Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
mywp
|
Posted - 2010.06.17 04:48:00 -
[1]
So, last fan-fest CCP announced that we might be seeing formations and in general discussion right now I read someone whining that there should be stacking penalties for the more ships / more dps used against a single target.
Let's discuss a more realistic and understandable approach. Why not incorporate line of sight into eve and use formations to make large fleets more cumbersome when fighting multiple targets ASWELL as bringing in the ability to flank an enemy formation and forcing them to warp out or turn their formation to face you. Also it makes station, asteroids and other objects in space tactical instead of just eye candy.
I mean, line of sight is something that should have probably existed in the beginning. I know many people oppose major changes to the game because they're scared how it will affect their way of fighting, their gameplay or such. But I see this as an addition.
How would it work... Quite simple.
Ship A wants to fire at ship B, neutral ship C is blocking line of sight. Ship A can't fire.
Ship A wants to fire at ship B, war target ship D is blocking line of sight. Ship A fires at ship D. (another tactic)
Ship A wants to fire at ship B, aggressed ship E is blocking line of sight. Ship A doesn't fire.
The only problem with this would be high security as it could be easy for a neutral target to interfere with a target, but that's a tactic too... I mean, this can happen in RL too where a neutral party will move between two people to prevent them from fighting.
It invites a whole new level of strategy into the game and forces a fleet to seperate blobs and actually have wings functions as individual groups instead of one maassive blob that listens to the FC for the next person to be insta-killed.
|
Misanthra
|
Posted - 2010.06.17 06:13:00 -
[2]
in a loaded system....the game currently can't turn off modules (your target died 30 seconds ago, weapons still cycling though lol). It doesn't need more calculations it can't handle.
On a really bad day (had one of these), you get the fun oppurtunity to see your corpse from the comfort of your pod. Saw mine for well over minute, went for a smoke break after that cause eventually the server would let me wake up in my station lol. What this would mean for your idea, a ship or a pod that is actually blown up is still on the grid and counts as being an obstacle. Do you really want ghost ships the server hasn't pulled of grid yet messing up your shots?
|
Spugg Galdon
|
Posted - 2010.06.17 08:46:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Spugg Galdon on 17/06/2010 08:52:08 The lag has to be fixed before the "Ze Blob" issue can be addressed. No idea how to fix the lag though.
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.06.17 09:29:00 -
[4]
eve-search:line of sight
Even when CCP would fix the lag, adding line of sight checks would bring the server to its knees again.
|
mywp
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 21:19:00 -
[5]
Edited by: mywp on 20/06/2010 21:20:23 Edited by: mywp on 20/06/2010 21:19:20
Originally by: darius mclever Even when CCP would fix the lag, adding line of sight checks would bring the server to its knees again.
You're obviously not a programmer. I had wrote about 2000 letters in a reply explaining in leymans terms client/server and the forums logged me out. I'm not typing it again. Simple terms:
There is a client side and a server side. -Clients are informed of outcomes and send requests. -Server deals with requests and replies with outcomes.
Line of sight can be integrated into the firing/locking routine of EVE online. This increases server load a small amount. It simply requires a tiny bit more data than it uses currently.
The outcome of line of sight should be a 1 second to 5 second pause of your guns and after 3 failed attempts, deactivation of your guns. What is the main 'cause of lag in EVE? Bandwidth. Does this routine have anything to do with bandwidth? No. It is self-contained and merely informs a player when his guns deactivate due to 3 failed attempts or when his guns don't fire due to line of sight. You could also expand the routine to fire at the object blocking line of sight depending on the space you're in and if the target is neutral or such and these settings should be configurable if possible. Objects which are blocking line of sight should have a chance to hit depending on your sensor resolution and the size of the ship so you can't insta kill shuttles and pods through this system.
I'm done with discussing this now, if you don't understand or you're not a programmer don't post about server resources. I want to hear a proper reason why line of sight should not be introduced. Not a hard-ware reason that doesn't exist.
|
Markus Reese
Caldari Estrale Frontiers
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 21:27:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Markus Reese on 20/06/2010 21:27:17 Well, of course to fix lag, need to reduce the datapacket as said above. Formations, could do this if they make one person fleet lead and thereby control say 5-10 ships as one. One datapacket sent. LoS I don't think is the answer to eve blob, though it would be cool. Main problem is the detail of control a ship can give. This however was an old solution of mine
That I think is easier than just line of sight, but if LoS fire is doable, that would be cooler.
|
Valandril
Caldari Ex-Mortis
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 21:34:00 -
[7]
Originally by: mywp Edited by: mywp on 20/06/2010 21:20:23 Edited by: mywp on 20/06/2010 21:19:20
Originally by: darius mclever Even when CCP would fix the lag, adding line of sight checks would bring the server to its knees again.
You're obviously not a programmer. I had wrote about 2000 letters in a reply explaining in leymans terms client/server and the forums logged me out. I'm not typing it again. Simple terms:
There is a client side and a server side. -Clients are informed of outcomes and send requests. -Server deals with requests and replies with outcomes.
Line of sight can be integrated into the firing/locking routine of EVE online. This increases server load a small amount. It simply requires a tiny bit more data than it uses currently.
The outcome of line of sight should be a 1 second to 5 second pause of your guns and after 3 failed attempts, deactivation of your guns. What is the main 'cause of lag in EVE? Bandwidth. Does this routine have anything to do with bandwidth? No. It is self-contained and merely informs a player when his guns deactivate due to 3 failed attempts or when his guns don't fire due to line of sight. You could also expand the routine to fire at the object blocking line of sight depending on the space you're in and if the target is neutral or such and these settings should be configurable if possible. Objects which are blocking line of sight should have a chance to hit depending on your sensor resolution and the size of the ship so you can't insta kill shuttles and pods through this system.
I'm done with discussing this now, if you don't understand or you're not a programmer don't post about server resources. I want to hear a proper reason why line of sight should not be introduced. Not a hard-ware reason that doesn't exist.
Damn ccp should hire you if you can get servers to the point where bw is the only problems with eve clusters, not that amount of r/s is bigger than server can handle and they have to queue up because server can't handle all of then on-the-spot which results in common server lag. You truly must be a great programmer if you can implement collisions system that will put close to no stress on server just because you add them to firing/locking routing. Dare to share the source with your implementation of solution ? Coz from my humble programming experience (apparently nowhere near to what you got) collisions (and LoS that requires them) are noticable cpu *****s.
Read latest "THE WORD" |
mywp
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 21:59:00 -
[8]
Quote: Damn ccp should hire you if you can get servers to the point where bw is the only problems with eve clusters, not that amount of r/s is bigger than server can handle and they have to queue up because server can't handle all of then on-the-spot which results in common server lag. You truly must be a great programmer if you can implement collisions system that will put close to no stress on server just because you add them to firing/locking routing. Dare to share the source with your implementation of solution ? Coz from my humble programming experience (apparently nowhere near to what you got) collisions (and LoS that requires them) are noticable cpu *****s.
You know, I've not even taken your argument seriously because of the way you acted. We're seeing CPUs upwards of 128 cores these days. I'm actually bored by your argument. From my experience, collision systems are not CPU *****s and that's all I'm going to say on the matter because I'll just be feeding a troll.
|
Valandril
Caldari Ex-Mortis
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 22:13:00 -
[9]
Originally by: mywp
Quote: Damn ccp should hire you if you can get servers to the point where bw is the only problems with eve clusters, not that amount of r/s is bigger than server can handle and they have to queue up because server can't handle all of then on-the-spot which results in common server lag. You truly must be a great programmer if you can implement collisions system that will put close to no stress on server just because you add them to firing/locking routing. Dare to share the source with your implementation of solution ? Coz from my humble programming experience (apparently nowhere near to what you got) collisions (and LoS that requires them) are noticable cpu *****s.
You know, I've not even taken your argument seriously because of the way you acted. We're seeing CPUs upwards of 128 cores these days. I'm actually bored by your argument. From my experience, collision systems are not CPU *****s and that's all I'm going to say on the matter because I'll just be feeding a troll.
Keep on repeating that to yourself and one day it may come true. At least that's what my mom used to say to me.
Read latest "THE WORD" |
Marshiro
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 22:26:00 -
[10]
The comedy language and optimization used in Eve servers means that CPU is the bottleneck until they rewrite everything. There may be 128 core systems, but its not like the server software can actually use it.
|
|
Misanthra
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 00:04:00 -
[11]
Originally by: mywp Edited by: mywp on 20/06/2010 21:20:23 Edited by: mywp on 20/06/2010 21:19:20
Originally by: darius mclever Even when CCP would fix the lag, adding line of sight checks would bring the server to its knees again.
You're obviously not a programmer. I had wrote about 2000 letters in a reply explaining in leymans terms client/server and the forums logged me out. I'm not typing it again. Simple terms:
And you obviously have never flown a snipe bs in null sec larger battles. Protip: we turn off brackets and fire from 150 km out. Means 2 things...ships are mere entries in the overview (we don't see pretty bracket making every thing mere dots on the screen) and we have no idea what is on the 150+ km path. In a fair fight where the lag monster miraculously was sleeping and could get a playable fight, have done 400 on 400. Under current system, these are are still marathon battles. If boths sides sustain numbers (me I blow up a drake, got another drake, titan bridged back, ho'd some more km's, blew up...back in under 5 minutes again) you get an extremely fun but long 2 hour battles. Throw on LOS and these larger battles will be unnecessarily longer.
And will also enforce even larger blob fleets to 1-2 shot all the t1 drakes that will be used as meat shields. Very familiar with the drake tank, one of my km's I am most proud of...took many people to being me down, and I did not die easy. And that was on my fleet fit drake whicn is no where as tanky as some annoying drake setups I have that serve only one purpose...waste players time and ammo waiting for the cavalry to arrive.
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |