Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Hung TuLo
Universal Fleet Operations Fatal Ascension
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:16:00 -
[1] - Quote
Is there some reason why EVE does not use stick and rudder space flying? Yes I realize that there is no Air/Oxygen in space but that does not mean the afterburners/Microwarpdrives could not be directional.
To me it would cause a great many more technical battles to occur
Just my thoughts. "In space all warriors are cold warriors" ----á General Chang-á Star Trek VI |
Karl Planck
Labyrinth Obtaining Chaotic Kangaroos
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:19:00 -
[2] - Quote
Try doing more frigate fights. Most larger ship battles do not depend on maneuvering well. Do you more frig fights and begin to learn the glory of manual piloting in eve |
Hung TuLo
Universal Fleet Operations Fatal Ascension
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:24:00 -
[3] - Quote
Karl Planck wrote:Try doing more frigate fights. Most larger ship battles do not depend on maneuvering well. Do you more frig fights and begin to learn the glory of manual piloting in eve
Ok but your talking about pointing in space and doing double clicks. I am talking about holding down keys for your movement. the longer you hold down the key the more you move in the direction. Same if you had a key for momentum or speed. The turning radius of your ship would show a slower change due to the size ofthe ship.
The space battles would depend more on the individual than the warp in of the ship. "In space all warriors are cold warriors" ----á General Chang-á Star Trek VI |
XIRUSPHERE
In Bacon We Trust
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:26:00 -
[4] - Quote
The server tick is too slow to handle live input from a stick and it would pretty much make the hamsters commit suicide. |
Abrazzar
271
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:27:00 -
[5] - Quote
Real time movement would require a large amount of server updates from and to the client. The resulting traffic would be infeasible to maintain.
Though I would like to see a somewhat better method of manoeuvring in space than double clicking somewhere and the orbit, approach and keep at range commands.
Edit: Maybe make a compromise and allow tick time based keyboard/mouse/joystick movement. Please visit your user settings to re-enable images. |
Hung TuLo
Universal Fleet Operations Fatal Ascension
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:30:00 -
[6] - Quote
XIRUSPHERE wrote:The server tick is too slow to handle live input from a stick and it would pretty much make the hamsters commit suicide.
But isnt each players position already being calculated so that damage and movement and distance is calculated?
The dialation process that is being discussed should be able to handle the additional input of keystrokes / second or faster. "In space all warriors are cold warriors" ----á General Chang-á Star Trek VI |
mkint
240
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:30:00 -
[7] - Quote
This idea is, and always has been pants-on-head-ruhtarded. No, your idea is not unique. It's still just as stupid an idea as when everyone else has posted it. Learn the basic game mechanics. Do the tutorials. THEN make stupid suggestions here. |
Karl Planck
Labyrinth Obtaining Chaotic Kangaroos
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:30:00 -
[8] - Quote
Hung TuLo wrote:Karl Planck wrote:Try doing more frigate fights. Most larger ship battles do not depend on maneuvering well. Do you more frig fights and begin to learn the glory of manual piloting in eve Ok but your talking about pointing in space and doing double clicks. I am talking about holding down keys for your movement. the longer you hold down the key the more you move in the direction. Same if you had a key for momentum or speed. The turning radius of your ship would show a slower change due to the size ofthe ship. The space battles would depend more on the individual than the warp in of the ship.
lol, just because you aren't used to it doesn't make it different. If you don't understand what I mean when i say there is a large degree of manual control in frig fights then you obviously haven't done many of them. Point and click is one thing, but range management and adaptability especially when it comes to control while OH'ing is huge. Again, not a huge thing in larger ship fights and even less of a big thing in fleet battles.
|
Ferrenc
TRIGGER FINGER - E.O.D Gryphon League
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:33:00 -
[9] - Quote
please forgive my ignorance on this one, but why cant ccp just buy a bunch of new hardware? is that not the problem? why cant lag be solved that way? if someone could give me like a really brief explaination of this it would be much appreciated |
Hung TuLo
Universal Fleet Operations Fatal Ascension
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:36:00 -
[10] - Quote
mkint wrote:This idea is, and always has been pants-on-head-ruhtarded. No, your idea is not unique. It's still just as stupid an idea as when everyone else has posted it. Learn the basic game mechanics. Do the tutorials. THEN make stupid suggestions here.
Mate, Not usre what is up your arse but I ve been playing this game for over a year. I PVP on a constant basis. I'm not going to lower myself to your level. YOu need to learn some manners. There are never stupid questions unless someone is trying to troll.
So be a good boy and leave the adults to answering the questions. "In space all warriors are cold warriors" ----á General Chang-á Star Trek VI |
|
gfldex
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:37:00 -
[11] - Quote
Hung TuLo wrote: But isnt each players position already being calculated so that damage and movement and distance is calculated?
Yes it is, once per second. The client is smoothing things out to give you the impression of proper movement.
Hung TuLo wrote: The dialation process that is being discussed should be able to handle the additional input of keystrokes / second or faster.
It's just a different way to handle all the timers in game in the same manner. |
Stan Smith
Remenent British Federation
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:38:00 -
[12] - Quote
this was a bad idea back in 2005 when i joined. nothing has changed. and no there is no way to get a bridge view from your ship |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:39:00 -
[13] - Quote
Ferrenc wrote:please forgive my ignorance on this one, but why cant ccp just buy a bunch of new hardware? is that not the problem? why cant lag be solved that way? if someone could give me like a really brief explaination of this it would be much appreciated
CCP has a supercomputer class set of processing power. Quite literally, millions of calculations/sec have to be processed when there are hundreds of ships in a system engaged. Every ship's velocity, position, EHP, DPS, cap, etc etc has to be calculated with regard to every other ship on grid.
And that does not even touch on the network bandwidth issues they are facing handling traffic from all over the world to simulate instantaneous fighting.
So no, they can't buy new hardware. |
Hung TuLo
Universal Fleet Operations Fatal Ascension
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:40:00 -
[14] - Quote
gfldex wrote:Hung TuLo wrote: But isnt each players position already being calculated so that damage and movement and distance is calculated?
Yes it is, once per second. The client is smoothing things out to give you the impression of proper movement. Hung TuLo wrote: The dialation process that is being discussed should be able to handle the additional input of keystrokes / second or faster.
It's just a different way to handle all the timers in game in the same manner.
Thanks mate, I realize there are an additional number of things to think of, was just wondering.
"In space all warriors are cold warriors" ----á General Chang-á Star Trek VI |
Hung TuLo
Universal Fleet Operations Fatal Ascension
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:42:00 -
[15] - Quote
Karl Planck wrote:Hung TuLo wrote:Karl Planck wrote:Try doing more frigate fights. Most larger ship battles do not depend on maneuvering well. Do you more frig fights and begin to learn the glory of manual piloting in eve Ok but your talking about pointing in space and doing double clicks. I am talking about holding down keys for your movement. the longer you hold down the key the more you move in the direction. Same if you had a key for momentum or speed. The turning radius of your ship would show a slower change due to the size ofthe ship. The space battles would depend more on the individual than the warp in of the ship. lol, just because you aren't used to it doesn't make it different. If you don't understand what I mean when i say there is a large degree of manual control in frig fights then you obviously haven't done many of them. Point and click is one thing, but range management and adaptability especially when it comes to control while OH'ing is huge. Again, not a huge thing in larger ship fights and even less of a big thing in fleet battles.
Hi Karl, I understand exactly what you are saying. With the rifter you are doing alot. I get that, really I do. IT would just seem alot smoother experience with a stick and rudder control system. "In space all warriors are cold warriors" ----á General Chang-á Star Trek VI |
Vertisce Soritenshi
SHADOW WARD
139
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:43:00 -
[16] - Quote
Basically you want control using WASD. I fully support this. Double clicking in space is lame and while doable not better than WASD. Anybody saying that this would cause server lag/issues, whatever...is full of ****. Last time I checked Star Trek online does it and it worked fine. In fact every other space MMO I have ever played has done it. Not to mention it really isn't any different than MMO's that are on the ground doing the same thing. They seem to have no problem. Calling out CCP for being lazy on this one. Make both methods an option at all times...problem solved.
+1 Support our boobies!-áLINKY! |
Syrinx Verrall
Xeno Labs
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:56:00 -
[17] - Quote
You're the captain of the ship, not it's helmsman. The physics engine was built with that in mind, and thus is unsuitable for stick and rudder stuff due to years and years worth of design decisions going in a different direction.
I'm sure they could cram it in there if they really wanted to, but it would end up a half-assed feature that doesn't fit the game.
|
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
191
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:57:00 -
[18] - Quote
Also ships in eve use gravity pull drives, those vents do not contrinbute to ship speed but to ship cooling instead. |
mkint
240
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:59:00 -
[19] - Quote
Because you suck at properly filing stuff (bad ideas should be in F&I, not GD) let's give you a less trolling answer. Server cycles are 1 Hz. That's 1 tick per second. In other words, EVERYONE always has a minimum of 1 second lag. Stick and rudder controls require there be pretty close to zero lag. Also consider, in a system that often lags out with only a 1hz cycle, what would happen if you added a CONSTANT stream of motion calculations to it? Not only is it a stupid idea from a game mechanics perspective (i.e., do the tutorials before you post stupid ideas in the wrong forums), it is absolutely impossible from a technical perspective. And no, buying new server hardware will not help... CCP has stated that millions of dollars of new hardware will grant almost no improvements (thus they have a whole team who's sole full time job is to optimize software to improve performance.) |
seany1212
Mind Games. 0ccupational Hazzard
21
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 19:06:00 -
[20] - Quote
Vertisce Soritenshi wrote:Basically you want control using WASD. I fully support this. Double clicking in space is lame and while doable not better than WASD. Anybody saying that this would cause server lag/issues, whatever...is full of ****. Last time I checked Star Trek online does it and it worked fine. In fact every other space MMO I have ever played has done it. Not to mention it really isn't any different than MMO's that are on the ground doing the same thing. They seem to have no problem. Calling out CCP for being lazy on this one. Make both methods an option at all times...problem solved.
+1
EVE is not star trek, and from what i was aware the last star trek MMO i heard of was getting shut down... If you want WASD keys go look for another game.
The server would lag as it would have to measure from the point at which you start turning from one key to the point at which you stopped pressing it, its not the same as a mouse click where all thats sent to the server is the new heading. So for you saying everyone else complaining is full of ****, get a clue first. |
|
Hung TuLo
Universal Fleet Operations Fatal Ascension
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 19:27:00 -
[21] - Quote
mkint wrote:Because you suck at properly filing stuff (bad ideas should be in F&I, not GD) let's give you a less trolling answer. Server cycles are 1 Hz. That's 1 tick per second. In other words, EVERYONE always has a minimum of 1 second lag. Stick and rudder controls require there be pretty close to zero lag. Also consider, in a system that often lags out with only a 1hz cycle, what would happen if you added a CONSTANT stream of motion calculations to it? Not only is it a stupid idea from a game mechanics perspective (i.e., do the tutorials before you post stupid ideas in the wrong forums), it is absolutely impossible from a technical perspective. And no, buying new server hardware will not help... CCP has stated that millions of dollars of new hardware will grant almost no improvements (thus they have a whole team who's sole full time job is to optimize software to improve performance.)
Ah now that is a better answer. You still have a problem with attitude. but better answer. Also how do you know if I "SUCK at properly flying stuff" have you ever seen my fly? I don't beleive I even know you.
So your still being a child. And thats ok. MOMMY still has alot of work to do with you doesn't she?
IF its technically impossible thats a great answer. I asked a simple question. I expected answers like I receivedfrom others. If its not posible its not possible. Just trying to understand why.
I wasnt asking for the great pumpkin to answer and immeadiatly remedy my question.
To all that did answer kindly I do appreciate it. "In space all warriors are cold warriors" ----á General Chang-á Star Trek VI |
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
31
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 19:28:00 -
[22] - Quote
Wow, a lot of flametards on this thread...
All the technical reasons people are posting about why it isn't possible are bs. Of course CCP could solve the problem if they wanted to go in that way. They use WASD in WiS for example. It might require changing or supplementing the architecture a bit or maybe not, but it's certainly not impossible.
But, yeah, it probably wouldn't be a great idea because:
Syrinx Verrall wrote:You're the captain of the ship, not it's helmsman. The physics engine was built with that in mind, and thus is unsuitable for stick and rudder stuff due to years and years worth of design decisions going in a different direction.
I'm sure they could cram it in there if they really wanted to, but it would end up a half-assed feature that doesn't fit the game.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
1132
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 19:35:00 -
[23] - Quote
Teamosil wrote:All the technical reasons people are posting about why it isn't possible are bs. No, they're not. They're pretty harsh limitations on what the server hardware and bandwidth (and your hardware and bandwidth) can handle.
Quote:Of course CCP could solve the problem if they wanted to go in that way. No. Not unless they wanted to drop the whole GÇ£MMOGÇ¥ thing or massively shard and instance the whole thing, would would ruin one of the unique features of the game.
Quote:They use WASD in WiS for example. Fun fact: WiS is not multiplayer, and the server doesn't really have to do anything to handle it. The WASD part of WiS could be complete client-side for all the difference it makes to the game GÇö the flying in space cannot. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
31
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 19:37:00 -
[24] - Quote
mkint wrote:Stick and rudder controls require there be pretty close to zero lag.
No, that's not true. Most MMOs have lag of a second or more pretty regularly and use some form of WASD. They just have the local client adjust your apparent position smoothly and the server is up to a second behind. So, maybe the other ship will actually be calculating it's tracking based on your position and speed from 1 second ago and whatnot, but you wouldn't notice the difference. Like in WoW for example, sometimes if there is a race situation, like where you're running to cap a flag, it might look to you like you got there half a second before the other guy, but the other guy is the one who actually gets the flag. That's because your client is showing your position ahead of where the server thinks you are by whatever amount of lag you have, whereas you are seeing the other guy where the server thinks he is plus whatever amount of lag you have. Minor issues like that are unavoiadable, but that sort of thing is no big deal. This isn't a new problem. These issues have been solved many times in many different ways by hundreds of games. |
Gealbhan
Celestial Horizon Corp. Flatline.
55
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 19:39:00 -
[25] - Quote
OP: stick and rudder game for ya: http://www.microsoft.com/games/en-US/Games/Pages/FlightSimXAcceleration.aspx |
Jita Alt666
449
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 19:45:00 -
[26] - Quote
Teamosil wrote:mkint wrote:Stick and rudder controls require there be pretty close to zero lag. No, that's not true. Most MMOs have lag of a second or more pretty regularly and use some form of WASD. They just have the local client adjust your apparent position smoothly and the server is up to a second behind. So, maybe the other ship will actually be calculating it's tracking based on your position and speed from 1 second ago and whatnot, but you wouldn't notice the difference. Like in WoW for example, sometimes if there is a race situation, like where you're running to cap a flag, it might look to you like you got there half a second before the other guy, but the other guy is the one who actually gets the flag. That's because your client is showing your position ahead of where the server thinks you are by whatever amount of lag you have, whereas you are seeing the other guy where the server thinks he is plus whatever amount of lag you have. Minor issues like that are unavoiadable, but that sort of thing is no big deal. This isn't a new problem. These issues have been solved many times in many different ways by hundreds of games.
How many other MMO's are single shard and have mechanics designed to support having over 1000 individual connections on one grid at a time?
|
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
192
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 19:48:00 -
[27] - Quote
or 9000 players
also how do you nose up or down up in a wasd? game? that be like wasd ijkl game instead. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
1132
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 19:55:00 -
[28] - Quote
Teamosil wrote:This isn't a new problem. These issues have been solved many times in many different ways by hundreds of games. GǪnone of which have had to deal with the issue on the scale required in EVE. That makes it a new problem. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
31
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 19:56:00 -
[29] - Quote
Tippia wrote:No, they're not. They're pretty harsh limitations on what the server hardware and bandwidth (and your hardware and bandwidth) can handle.
No. Not unless they wanted to drop the whole GÇ£MMOGÇ¥ thing or massively shard and instance the whole thing, would would ruin one of the unique features of the game.
I think you're just identifying challenges they would face. Definitely operating in a single universe model presents challenges their developers would need to overcome, but that is a far cry from saying its impossible. I was a developer and then managed a team of developers for about 12 years and I don't recall ever encountering a technical issue we couldn't figure out a way to overcome. As long as there is a source of whatever data you need, you can pretty much always figure out how to architect a solution. Maybe they split off the position-related processing on to another cluster and have the two clusters only talk back and forth when needed, maybe they push more of the processing to client side, maybe they set up a bunch of different clusters all talking to the same central database, maybe they can just expand the size of the current cluster with more blades, maybe they segment off systems on to different clusters with inter-system stuff like updating market prices and whatnot on one main cluster, maybe they change the way they track position entirely to make it less intensive at the software level, maybe they make some database optimization they didn't need to previously. There are tons of possible areas the techies could explore possible solutions. I have no idea which ones would end up viable and which wouldn't. Nobody outside of CCP really would. But load just isn't the kind of problem that ever results in an "that's not possible" answer.
Tippia wrote:Fun fact: WiS is not multiplayer, and the server doesn't really have to do anything to handle it. The WASD part of WiS could be complete client-side for all the difference it makes to the game GÇö the flying in space cannot.
Yeah, they haven't rolled it out yet really, but obviously they think it is possible to do, right? |
SpaceSquirrels
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 20:05:00 -
[30] - Quote
Also that damage is really a dice roll. Yeah there are controllable variables, but at the end of the day you click shoot game decides if you hit and how much. So it's not like you can really dodge fire in he greater sense of things. Until you can really "aim" your own fire not a whole lot of point. |
|
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
32
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 20:07:00 -
[31] - Quote
Jita Alt666 wrote:How many other MMO's are single shard and have mechanics designed to support having over 1000 individual connections on one grid at a time?
I don't know that that makes a huge difference. 10 clusters of 10 servers each writing to 10 different databases isn't really that different than 1 cluster of 100 servers writing to 1 database cluster of 10 servers. There are some bottlenecks you would need to deal with more in the later scenario, but I certainly don't see why it makes it impossible. Single shard just means they all use the same database, but databases can scale up to thousands of servers these days. |
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
32
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 20:12:00 -
[32] - Quote
SpaceSquirrels wrote:Also that damage is really a dice roll. Yeah there are controllable variables, but at the end of the day you click shoot game decides if you hit and how much. So it's not like you can really dodge fire in he greater sense of things. Until you can really "aim" your own fire not a whole lot of point.
I'm not advocating this. I like it how it is. But there are some kind of cool things you can do with space combat without aiming your weapons. Star Trek had kind of an interesting spin on it where you would fit different guns facing different directions. Some could fire over a very wide arc, some very narrow arcs, then you had different shields for each side of your ship. So you were constantly adjusting position to try to get your main front gun lined up with them or to expose your shield with the most strength left or whatever. I don't think EVE should go that way, but it was kind of cool. |
Lord Ryan
True Xero
74
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 20:17:00 -
[33] - Quote
Stan Smith wrote:this was a bad idea back in 2005 when i joined. nothing has changed. and no there is no way to get a bridge view from your ship
Give me my bridge view or I'll pod your ass back to 2005! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=29043&find=unread I want to fly a badass Mon Calamari stlye-ácruiser painted to match my Tron clothes. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
1132
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 20:17:00 -
[34] - Quote
Teamosil wrote:Definitely operating in a single universe model presents challenges their developers would need to overcome, but that is a far cry from saying its impossible. Actually, with the current tech, it pretty much says that it's impossible.
The servers and the clients and the connection between them can't handle it. Making it GÇ£possibleGÇ¥ technically would make it impossible economically due to how few people would be able to subscribe and how much the servers would cost to support them. Until ye olde Moore's Law has had another decade to work and even the US has jumped on the broadband band-wagon, then maybe the two will move towards some point of intersection, but right now, no.
Quote:As long as there is a source of whatever data you need, you can pretty much always figure out how to architect a solution. And that's the problem: the source
Quote:maybe they push more of the processing to client side The problem with that solution is that it can only go so far, and it comes at an unacceptable price: client data alteration. You cannot trust the client. Planetside already proved this (as well as why this kind of direct control is less than optimal for MMOs in general).
The other problem is: why add it? What does it actually add after all that fiddling? Joystick (and WASD) control makes sense when we're talking about one-man fighters and a Wing Commander scale on the shipsGǪ in EVE, we're talking about M1/M2/M7-class ships from the X-series (and as anyone who has played those with a joystick will tell you GÇö a joystick makes fuckall difference in manoeuvring those ships, and you're really just more likely to snap the thing from constantly leaning on it for a minute to make a full turn).
Quote:Yeah, they haven't rolled it out yet really, but obviously they think it is possible to do, right? They think that WiS won't be nearly as time-critical as FiS, I'd say, not to mention that the world interaction is far lighter and far less cruicalGǪ
GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Alice Katsuko
Terra Incognita Intrepid Crossing
31
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 20:19:00 -
[35] - Quote
There are both technical and conceptual reasons for why you cannot use a joystick or WASD to control your spaceship.
(1) Server-side calculations are performed in one-second ticks, including Destiny physics calculations. While the client gives the impression of real-time movement, the actual game does not run real-time. Proper joystick control would require near real-time physics calculations, at least to provide the real-time responsiveness that the op wants, else you would either get rubberbanding from disagreement between client and server simulation, or delayed response while the server performs its calculations and sends back the results. Real-time simulation would not be an issue for small fights, but would quickly overload the server for medium and large fights, especially if each client started sending out a dozen updates to the ship's vector each second.
(2) WiS is a separate environment, which does not require physics calculations. The WiS server does not need to keep track of your avatar's momentum, velocity and bounding box. Similarly, virtually all other games have no physics simulation, and only track an avatar's coordinates.
(3) WASD does not work well for controlling avatars in a fully three-dimensional space from a third-person perspective. It works well from a first-person perspective, where WASD is used to move the character along the axis of view and the mouse is used to orient the character. Such as system was used in Descent and in iWar, for example. EVE would not work well in a first-person view without a major redesign of the entire interface due to information flow issues. A pilot restricted only to the first-person view would not be easily able to ascertain the position of enemy and friendly ships, for example. The alternative would be to use additional buttons to control ship orientation or z-axis motion, but that sounds more cumbersome than the current double-click mechanic, which is nice and simple once you get used to it.
(4) You do not fly battleship using a joystick. The way ships move in EVE is not geared towards a joystick-style control scheme, aside perhaps from interceptors and frigates. |
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
32
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 20:23:00 -
[36] - Quote
Tippia wrote:The servers and the clients and the connection between them can't handle it. Making it GÇ£possibleGÇ¥ technically would make it impossible economically due to how few people would be able to subscribe and how much the servers would cost to support them.
That could certainly be true. No argument there. It could be too expensive a problem to solve given their current subscriber base.
Tippia wrote:The problem with that solution is that it can only go so far, and it comes at an unacceptable price: client data alteration. You cannot trust the client.
You don't necessarily need to. For example, the client could be updating the position it displays to you to get around lag, but the server could calculate the true position, so the client isn't telling the server where you are, it is telling the server how you move.
Tippia wrote:The other problem is: why add it? What does it actually add after all that fiddling? Joystick (and WASD) control makes sense when we're talking about one-man fighters and a Wing Commander scale on the shipsGǪ in EVE, we're talking about M1/M2/M7-class ships from the X-series (and as anyone who has played those with a joystick will tell you GÇö a joystick makes fuckall difference in manoeuvring those ships, and you're really just more likely to snap the thing from constantly leaning on it for a minute to make a full turn).
Yeah, I agree. I have said a couple times I don't think they should do it. I'm just saying they could make EVE into that kind of a game if they wanted to. |
mkint
242
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 20:26:00 -
[37] - Quote
Teamosil wrote: 1 - Maybe they split off the position-related processing on to another cluster and have the two clusters only talk back and forth when needed, 2 - maybe they push more of the processing to client side, 3 - maybe they set up a bunch of different clusters all talking to the same central database, 4 - maybe they can just expand the size of the current cluster with more blades, 5 - maybe they segment off systems on to different clusters with inter-system stuff like updating market prices and whatnot on one main cluster, 6 - maybe they change the way they track position entirely to make it less intensive at the software level, 7 - maybe they make some database optimization they didn't need to previously.
1 It already mostly is. The simulation is run on the solar node and not much else is. 2 number 1 rule of developing MMO's is never ever ever ever trust the client. If you do, people will have an incentive to hack the client (and they WILL do it) breaking the game forever. The client is for user input/output purposes ONLY. 3 the simulation has very very little to do with any central database. 4 that is so off from reality, I don't even know how to tell you. 5 they already do this 6 that would require rewriting the entire game from the ground up. I believe the appropriate word is "insurmountable" 7 already being done. 10% is considered a massive improvement. stick and rudder would need something like 10,000%
Quote: There are tons of possible areas the techies could explore possible solutions. I have no idea which ones would end up viable and which wouldn't. Nobody outside of CCP really would.
But load just isn't the kind of problem that ever results in an "that's not possible" answer.
CCP is very open in their techie devblogs since technical problems started killing EVE 2 years ago. Anyone who keeps up with what goes on behind the scenes would have a good idea of what the server can handle. Go back and start reading tech blogs from about 2 years ago, and catch up on how EVE is put together.
Also, a lack of technology very very often results in a "that's not possible" answer. Of course, introduction of new technology can (eventually) address the "that's not possible" answer, however technology can never fix a "that's a stupid idea" suggestion. |
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
32
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 21:01:00 -
[38] - Quote
mkint wrote:2 number 1 rule of developing MMO's is never ever ever ever trust the client. If you do, people will have an incentive to hack the client (and they WILL do it) breaking the game forever. The client is for user input/output purposes ONLY.
Addressed above. Agree you wouldn't offload anything you didn't want hacked to the client, but that's only some stuff.
mkint wrote:4 that is so off from reality, I don't even know how to tell you.
How do you mean? Economically? That may be true, I don't know. Technically, of course they can add more servers to a cluster.
mkint wrote:6 that would require rewriting the entire game from the ground up. I believe the appropriate word is "insurmountable"
No offense, but you're just talking out of your ass on this one. You have no idea how they track and store location data. Like, what type of variable is it stored in? Is part of a complicated object or an array or a native variable type? How do they search it? How are they updating it? Etc. None of that is stuff you would even notice if they decided to change to facilitate using it in a different way, so I don't see how you could possibly assume that they would need to re-write the whole game...
mkint wrote:7 already being done. 10% is considered a massive improvement.
"Already being done" isn't really an answer that makes sense in this context. Optimizing a database isn't like just a knob you turn from "poorly optimized" to "well optimized". You tweak it to perform specific tasks better at the expense of the performance of other tasks or disk space or memory usage or whatever. As you add in new demands on the database new optimizations become relevant that wouldn't have been before, etc. What I am saying is that presently they don't do WASD, so the database wouldn't be optimized for that. To just hazard a guess as to whether it could be optimized in a way to make those transactions trivial is fruitless. You'd need to be intimately familiar with many thousands of lines of CCP's code and stored procedures and indexes and blah blah blah, none of which you or I are...
mkint wrote:stick and rudder would need something like 10,000%
That's silly to think that just adding WASD would somehow increase the load on the servers or the database 100 times over... Your client is already talking to the server every second. Every second the server is already doing some kind of process for you. It's just adding on a little bit of data being sent each time that you move around and doing a little bit more calculation on their side. Neither of us could actually know with any degree of accuracy, but I would guess more like a 10% increase in load.
Maybe we're just talking about different things. If you're saying "given their current architecture and budget this isn't something they can do", that may well be true. That's what all the dev blogs are about- stuff like "hey we got a new proxy this weekend so blah blah blah". That isn't relevant to what it is possible for them to do, that's what they are doing. |
Cat Casidy
Percussive Diplomacy
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 21:11:00 -
[39] - Quote
You seem to not know alot of things for someone who says everyone else is wrong... |
Barakkus
1000
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 21:14:00 -
[40] - Quote
Someone wrote an app that would let you pilot your internet spaceships with a joystick, it's up on the old forums somewhere...don't know what happened to the project though. It basically read the joystick movements and performed the clicks in space for you. Was very interesting to see it working. |
|
mkint
243
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 21:28:00 -
[41] - Quote
Teamosil wrote:mkint wrote:4 that is so off from reality, I don't even know how to tell you. How do you mean? Economically? That may be true, I don't know. Technically, of course they can add more servers to a cluster. What you're suggesting basically tantamount to suggesting that buying a laptop will make your desktop faster. Adding a new CPU does not affect the processing power of the CPUs in a cluster. In the initial investigations of multi-threading the simulation showed that it would actually HURT performance most of the time, while costing an insane amount of dev time to implement, plus who knows how many bugs. EVE is written in Python, which does not do multithreading, so to get it to do so would be a "dirty hack" that's extremely inefficient. That said, CCP has been figuring out ways to shift stuff away from python, which, among a lot more server stuff, can be read about in the dev blogs.
Quote: No offense, but you're just talking out of your ass on this one. You have no idea how they track and store location data. Like, what type of variable is it stored in? Is part of a complicated object or an array or a native variable type? How do they search it? How are they updating it? Etc. None of that is stuff you would even notice if they decided to change to facilitate using it in a different way, so I don't see how you could possibly assume that they would need to re-write the whole game...
it's not about variables, it's about basic game mechanics. How weapons tracking is stored, how explosion velocities are done. Even if you exclude shooting, you still have the problem that on the server, all the ships in EVE are a perfect sphere with no front, back, up, or down. They are essentially 1 dimensional objects. stick/rudder assumes there's such a thing as front and back rather than just current vector and target vector. That can't really be fixed without entirely rewriting the entire simulation engine, and therefore the entire weapons engine.
Quote: "Already being done" isn't really an answer that makes sense in this context. Optimizing a database isn't like just a knob you turn from "poorly optimized" to "well optimized". You tweak it to perform specific tasks better at the expense of the performance of other tasks or disk space or memory usage or whatever. As you add in new demands on the database new optimizations become relevant that wouldn't have been before, etc. What I am saying is that presently they don't do WASD, so the database wouldn't be optimized for that. To just hazard a guess as to whether it could be optimized in a way to make those transactions trivial is fruitless. You'd need to be intimately familiar with many thousands of lines of CCP's code and stored procedures and indexes and blah blah blah, none of which you or I are...
already being done as in there is a team working full time on optimizing the server with the intent to improve performance. You're saying "there is no magic fix" and yet you just asked for one.
Quote: That's silly to think that just adding WASD would somehow increase the load on the servers or the database 100 times over... Your client is already talking to the server every second. Every second the server is already doing some kind of process for you. It's just adding on a little bit of data being sent each time that you move around and doing a little bit more calculation on their side. Neither of us could actually know with any degree of accuracy, but I would guess more like a 10% increase in load.
Maybe we're just talking about different things. If you're saying "given their current architecture and budget this isn't something they can do", that may well be true. But that is a far cry from saying that they couldn't do it if they wanted to. Of course they could make EVE into that kind of a game if they wanted to.
The server can handle a maximum of 1 movement command per second. Adding WASD or especially stick/rudder would be throwing hundreds of movement command per second. From thousands of pilots. All on the same CPU. And trying to do the extra collisions and stuff that's generated on top of it.
From a technical perspective, it's a bad idea. From a development perspective, it's a bad idea. From a gameplay perspective, it's a bad idea. From an "I've never played EVE before" perspective it seems like a good idea. And that's what makes it so annoying every time some rookie suggests it. |
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
32
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 21:29:00 -
[42] - Quote
Cat Casidy wrote:You seem to not know alot of things for someone who says everyone else is wrong...
That's sort of my point. People on this thread are just speculating that things are "impossible" that they couldn't possibly know that about. Knowing what impact WASD would have on the server architechture and what options there would be for ameliorating that impact are not the kinds of things some random user of an application can just pull out of their ass, they're the sort of questions that you would have a team of techies who are intimately familiar with the code and the hardware architecture and the database design sit down and work on for a few weeks just to get a rough idea of the parameters you're working in and options you have.
If I were leading a development for a client and they requested a particular feature and I tasked a dev to spec out a solution, and he came back after a week and said it wasn't possible, I'd be stunned. That has virtually never happened in my entire career. But if it did, I would assign a more senior dev to work with him and send them back to examine the question more deeply and they would invariably come back with a solution. A dev that came to the "it's impossible" conclusion more than a couple times would pretty much be on his way to a job in tech support. That is really almost never the answer except in very extraordinary situations, and a feature most MMOs have certainly doesn't strike me as remotely in that category. For people who have never even seen a single line of the code or analyzed a single server log file to be assuming they know enough to reach the extraordinary conclusion that it is impossible off the cuff is just not reasonable at all. |
Barakkus
1000
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 21:35:00 -
[43] - Quote
mkint wrote:...lots of quotes and stuff...
Um you are talking out your ass, sorry to break it to you.
Might want to learn a bit about that which you want to argue about on the intert00bz with people before trying to sound like you know what you're talking about. |
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
32
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 21:43:00 -
[44] - Quote
mkint wrote:What you're suggesting basically tantamount to suggesting that buying a laptop will make your desktop faster. Adding a new CPU does not affect the processing power of the CPUs in a cluster. In the initial investigations of multi-threading the simulation showed that it would actually HURT performance most of the time, while costing an insane amount of dev time to implement, plus who knows how many bugs. EVE is written in Python, which does not do multithreading, so to get it to do so would be a "dirty hack" that's extremely inefficient. That said, CCP has been figuring out ways to shift stuff away from python, which, among a lot more server stuff, can be read about in the dev blogs.
Your argument would only be relevant if they were only serving one client. They have thousands of clients, so you have multiple clients per CPU. Add more CPUs, fewer clients per CPU.
mkint wrote:it's not about variables, it's about basic game mechanics. How weapons tracking is stored, how explosion velocities are done. Even if you exclude shooting, you still have the problem that on the server, all the ships in EVE are a perfect sphere with no front, back, up, or down. They are essentially 1 dimensional objects. stick/rudder assumes there's such a thing as front and back rather than just current vector and target vector. That can't really be fixed without entirely rewriting the entire simulation engine, and therefore the entire weapons engine.
Ok, you're just talking about a totally different thing than I am. I'm saying they could look at ways to optimize the way that they store and communicate location information to optimize it for WASD, so what might seem like a big strain right now, might not be if they took at different technical approach.
As to your argument here about needing a front and a back, I don't think that really matters, does it? They display your ship facing a particular direction, so that part is already handled, it would just be a matter of translating W into the same data they send if you double click off to the left, right?
mkint wrote:already being done as in there is a team working full time on optimizing the server with the intent to improve performance. You're saying "there is no magic fix" and yet you just asked for one.
I don't think you followed what I'm saying. I'm saying the database could be perfectly optimized right now for double click based navigation, but it could be that a different optimization would be better for WASD. Again, that's something there is no way you or I could possibly know without being very deep in the code and database design.
mkint wrote:The server can handle a maximum of 1 movement command per second. Adding WASD or especially stick/rudder would be throwing hundreds of movement command per second. From thousands of pilots. All on the same CPU. And trying to do the extra collisions and stuff that's generated on top of it.
Hundreds of commands a second would be like a 10% increase in their load. If that. That's my point. They're already doing one set of transactions per second for every pilot in space, and I bet every pilot online.
No, not all on the same CPU... Not sure where you get that idea from. They run a cluster of servers, each with two CPUs. The load is spread across all those. 120 CPUs last update I saw. |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
194
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 21:50:00 -
[45] - Quote
Mind if I say that, whats the use of flight stick control? It seems to be something utterly worthless compared to the massive amount of work required to impliment. This almost sounds like a quater million project that wont pay for itself off. |
mkint
245
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 21:52:00 -
[46] - Quote
There was an issue with parsing this post's BBCode |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
131
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 21:55:00 -
[47] - Quote
Hung TuLo wrote:Is there some reason why EVE does not use stick and rudder space flying? Yes I realize that there is no Air/Oxygen in space but that does not mean the afterburners/Microwarpdrives could not be directional.
To me it would cause a great many more technical battles to occur
Just my thoughts.
You know, when I first got here, ooh in '07 I think, I asked the same thing. Now in '11, I can say with certainty, you're in the wrong game if you're looking for that.
We want breast augmentations and sluttier clothing in the NeX! |
Barakkus
1001
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 21:56:00 -
[48] - Quote
There was an issue with parsing this post's BBCode |
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
32
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 21:56:00 -
[49] - Quote
mkint wrote:url=http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=author&p=CCP%20Veritas&pid=1409705149 <- Start Here url=http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=2332 <-Drop by here url=http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=author&p=CCP%20Masterplan&pid=901599088 <-don't forget here url=http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=author&p=CCP%20Yokai&pid=870534556 <-worth checking out this url=http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=2288 <-interesting if not totally relevant
Should be enough info there for why this kind of thing is a bad idea from a technical perspective. Plus there was the part (probably a forum thread) where a dev said "this isn't going to happen. Ever."
edit: changed links to not-links because apparently the crappy new forums can't handle links to other CCP resources. Seriously, those forums devs suck for oh so many reasons.
Yeah, I guess we're just talking about different things. You're assuming they stick with the current design, I'm saying they could come up with a design to make WASD work. |
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
60
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 22:00:00 -
[50] - Quote
Vertisce Soritenshi wrote:Basically you want control using WASD. I fully support this. Double clicking in space is lame and while doable not better than WASD. Anybody saying that this would cause server lag/issues, whatever...is full of ****. Last time I checked Star Trek online does it and it worked fine. In fact every other space MMO I have ever played has done it. Not to mention it really isn't any different than MMO's that are on the ground doing the same thing. They seem to have no problem. Calling out CCP for being lazy on this one. Make both methods an option at all times...problem solved.
+1
Last time I checked, ST Online didn't had 50,000 players in the same server at once.
Also CCP can't do much about player side ping. So... no affordable NEx store... no full-fledged Incarna... no casual content... no solo content... no PvE content...-á
Why should I keep paying to play this game? |
|
Kemuel
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 22:03:00 -
[51] - Quote
Teamosil wrote:mkint wrote:What you're suggesting basically tantamount to suggesting that buying a laptop will make your desktop faster. Adding a new CPU does not affect the processing power of the CPUs in a cluster. In the initial investigations of multi-threading the simulation showed that it would actually HURT performance most of the time, while costing an insane amount of dev time to implement, plus who knows how many bugs. EVE is written in Python, which does not do multithreading, so to get it to do so would be a "dirty hack" that's extremely inefficient. That said, CCP has been figuring out ways to shift stuff away from python, which, among a lot more server stuff, can be read about in the dev blogs. Your argument would only be relevant if they were only serving one client. They have thousands of clients, so you have multiple clients per CPU. Add more CPUs, fewer clients per CPU. mkint wrote:it's not about variables, it's about basic game mechanics. How weapons tracking is stored, how explosion velocities are done. Even if you exclude shooting, you still have the problem that on the server, all the ships in EVE are a perfect sphere with no front, back, up, or down. They are essentially 1 dimensional objects. stick/rudder assumes there's such a thing as front and back rather than just current vector and target vector. That can't really be fixed without entirely rewriting the entire simulation engine, and therefore the entire weapons engine. Ok, you're just talking about a totally different thing than I am. I'm saying they could look at ways to optimize the way that they store and communicate location information to optimize it for WASD, so what might seem like a big strain right now, might not be if they took at different technical approach. As to your argument here about needing a front and a back, I don't think that really matters, does it? They display your ship facing a particular direction, so that part is already handled, it would just be a matter of translating W into the same data they send if you double click off to the left, right? mkint wrote:already being done as in there is a team working full time on optimizing the server with the intent to improve performance. You're saying "there is no magic fix" and yet you just asked for one. I don't think you followed what I'm saying. I'm saying the database could be perfectly optimized right now for double click based navigation, but it could be that a different optimization would be better for WASD. Again, that's something there is no way you or I could possibly know without being very deep in the code and database design. mkint wrote:The server can handle a maximum of 1 movement command per second. Adding WASD or especially stick/rudder would be throwing hundreds of movement command per second. From thousands of pilots. All on the same CPU. And trying to do the extra collisions and stuff that's generated on top of it. Hundreds of commands a second would be like a 10% increase in their load. If that. That's my point. They're already doing one set of transactions per second for every pilot in space, and I bet every pilot online. No, not all on the same CPU... Not sure where you get that idea from. They run a cluster of servers, each with two CPUs. The load is spread across all those. 120 CPUs last update I saw.
Basic math would dictate that 100 is 10000% more than 1. You are advocating at least that much more load with current hardware and software limitations. That is if it is ONLY 100 more calculations. You are correct in saying that it is not impossible but it certainly can be deemed unfeasible. Limits of time and money are a factor here and with CCP's current liabilities as well as laying off staff this idea just cannot be done at this time.
Even if they had the resouces to somehow increase functionality of the server to take 10000% more load I am sure they would use that to make fleet fights better and finish Incarna. |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Industrial Complex Cosmic Consortium
250
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 22:13:00 -
[52] - Quote
Tippia wrote:They think that WiS won't be nearly as time-critical as FiS, I'd say, not to mention that the world interaction is far lighter and far less cruicalGǪ
Plus there were indications that there was going to be no collision detection in WiS (i.e.: you'd be able to walk through people). With no collision detection, the knowledge of a character's position in the environment isn't relevant to gameplay. You can move with the appearance of real-time control, watching other people walk smoothly around the station, with no two players seeing the same scene.
As any developer knows, there's a huge difference in programming style between low volume interactive, real time interactive, high volume real time and high volume batch processing. In some cases, interrupt driven provides better responsiveness. In other cases, polling is the only option (since interrupts reduce potential processing by 50%).
Then there's the difference between 2D maths and 3D maths: you have 50% more processing even for the simplest operations. Then throw hundreds of people into the one scene, as opposed to World of Warcraft which stutters and stalls when you get more than 100 characters into the same scene (there is a reason for BGs being limited to 40 a side, or why Ironforge is called lagforge).
If it was possible for CCP to implement one of (stick+rudder control) or (line of sight weapon fire), I'd chose the latter.
If you want stick+rudder control, go play Freespace I & II :)
|
Lors Dornick
Kallisti Industries
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 22:14:00 -
[53] - Quote
This would be possible if you only had to deal with your own ship plus AI rats.
As soon you have more than one human pilot you'll need to distribute the ships navigational information to all other ships on the grid. And you'll have to do that with relatively low lag or ships will either appear to be being at different locations on different clients.
Offloading some calculations to the client will not solve that since your client have no chance of knowing what my client just calculated and displayed until the server has distributed that data.
The server(s) operate on 1 second tick (or longer in extreme cases with the new TiDi) to be able to let every client have the same data.
Adding more servers, cpus, cores or threads will not increase the processing power until the server code is recoded so that it can use it.
They have already offloaded much (or even most) of the code not related to the active on grid calculations and data handling but to spread the core grid handling over several servers/cpus/cores simply isn't possible without a very deep and serious rewrite.
tl;dr
It might be possible, if you wrote a new game from scratch. |
arcca jeth
Dark Alliance Dark Empire Alliance
20
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 22:18:00 -
[54] - Quote
I'd like to see frigates only, allowed to fly in WASD mode, being as they are really the only ships that are capable of hitting speeds enough to justify it. Someone said in this thread that we are captains......well we are also called pilots....not much of a pilot then are we? Larger ships over frigate, yes we are captains, in frigates, well we are pilots. but there is no skill in keeping at range and orbit at optimal. it would add some different flavor to frigate fights at least. Controls are controls, we use WASD AND click to move for our avatars, how this is not capable of being done in flight for frigates is just laughable.
Also, CCP's advertising videos lure in new players with shots of frigates flying around doing sweet maneuvers and such. Imagine the disappointment of a new player who joined because they thought that was sweet, then to find out all they can do is orbit. I imagine it would have been a quick decision for them to not continue playing. I know I almost did when I first started, i laughed at how stupid and lame the controls were for my rookie ship, thankfully for CCP, I had a friend that convinced me to give it more time. Now I have been here for 5 years. I've read some really funny excuses in this thread, and that's all they are, excuses. |
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 22:36:00 -
[55] - Quote
Kemuel wrote:Basic math would dictate that 100 is 10000% more than 1. You are advocating at least that much more load with current hardware and software limitations. That is if it is ONLY 100 more calculations. You are correct in saying that it is not impossible but it certainly can be deemed unfeasible. Limits of time and money are a factor here and with CCP's current liabilities as well as laying off staff this idea just cannot be done at this time.
Even if they had the resouces to somehow increase functionality of the server to take 10000% more load I am sure they would use that to make fleet fights better and finish Incarna.
100 is 10,000% of 1? Where do you get the 100 or the 1? I'm not sure what you're talking about.
The info I'm seeing says they have about 2,500 database transactions per second average. (That's from 2007, not sure if it is higher or lower now) Not sure what percentage of client communications require accessing the database, but to be very conservative, lets say 1/4 of them do. If that's so, then their current load is around 10,000 transactions per second. Mkint speculated that adding WASD could generate hundreds of transactions a second. So, lets say 500. If so, that would be a 5% increase in load.
But yeah, even accomodating a 5% increase in load might not be realistic given the economic constraints with the unsubs and layoffs and whatnot. |
Vertisce Soritenshi
SHADOW WARD
140
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 22:41:00 -
[56] - Quote
Teamosil wrote:Cat Casidy wrote:You seem to not know alot of things for someone who says everyone else is wrong... People on this thread are just speculating that things are "impossible" that they couldn't possibly know that about. Knowing what impact WASD would have on the server architechture and what options there would be for ameliorating that impact are not the kinds of things some random user of an application can just pull out of their ass, they're the sort of questions that you would have a team of techies who are intimately familiar with the code and the hardware architecture and the database design sit down and work on for a few weeks just to get a rough idea of the parameters you're working in and options you have.
I have been saying this for a very long time about people on these forums.
I remember when people were saying it is impossible to upgrade the graphics drastically in an MMO because you would have to completely rewrite the game code from the ground up and no MMO has ever or ever will be able to do it. Then CCP does it...and then did it again...and is doing it again.
Fact is we have no idea what is and isn't possible to do from a developers standpoint and it is foolish to assume you do.
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:Vertisce Soritenshi wrote:Basically you want control using WASD. I fully support this. Double clicking in space is lame and while doable not better than WASD. Anybody saying that this would cause server lag/issues, whatever...is full of ****. Last time I checked Star Trek online does it and it worked fine. In fact every other space MMO I have ever played has done it. Not to mention it really isn't any different than MMO's that are on the ground doing the same thing. They seem to have no problem. Calling out CCP for being lazy on this one. Make both methods an option at all times...problem solved.
+1 Last time I checked, ST Online didn't had 50,000 players in the same server at once. Also CCP can't do much about player side ping.
I think you are confusing the difference between "server" and "shard". EvE is one "world" or "shard" but I guarantee you there is more than one "server" running EvE. Not all 50,000 people are logged onto a single one server at any given time unless every damned person in EvE is in Jita... Support our boobies!-áLINKY! |
Nariya Kentaya
Celestial Ascension
56
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 22:46:00 -
[57] - Quote
Hung TuLo wrote:mkint wrote:This idea is, and always has been pants-on-head-ruhtarded. No, your idea is not unique. It's still just as stupid an idea as when everyone else has posted it. Learn the basic game mechanics. Do the tutorials. THEN make stupid suggestions here. Mate, Not usre what is up your arse but I ve been playing this game for over a year. I PVP on a constant basis. I'm not going to lower myself to your level. YOu need to learn some manners. There are never stupid questions unless someone is trying to troll. So be a good boy and leave the adults to answering the questions. over a eyar? then you must obviously know that when your in a friggin fleet battle or any battle worth fighting, your not even LOOKING at your ship, your looking at the opponent(s) and your camera is NOT behind your ship, making any kind of meaningful controls with directional keys nigh-impossible.
and lets not even get started on large fleet fights, where your zoomed out so far all you see is brackets. you wont even be able to see where your ship is let alone what direction it is going. and before you say "it would make players keep their camera on their ship for {insert immersion/tactical/etc excuse here}" being close enough to see your ship in LARGE fights is impossible without a computer capable of processing all that, and i know alot of people who dont.
the way the controls work in this game makes sense, whether it be from a function or lore standpoint. lorewise your a capsuleer acting as a bio-computer of sorts giving orders to your ship, such as "head towards this guy, dont go too close" your not at a joystick/steering wheel.
honestly, all directional pads would do is add unneccessary controls during fleet fights making combat more micro-management then pew pew. |
Psychophantic
88
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 22:47:00 -
[58] - Quote
Can't wait to fly my freighter using stick.
As much as I used to love xwing vs tiefighter I'm gonna have to go with the no. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
1145
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 22:48:00 -
[59] - Quote
Teamosil wrote:The info I'm seeing says they have about 2,500 database transactions per second average. (That's from 2007, not sure if it is higher or lower now) Not sure what percentage of client communications require accessing the database, but to be very conservative, lets say 1/4 of them do. If that's so, then their current load is around 10,000 transactions per second. Mkint speculated that adding WASD could generate hundreds of transactions a second. So, lets say 500. If so, that would be a 5% increase in load. He said hundreds of transactions a second per player. So let's say 20,000,000 total. If so, that would an 800,000% increase GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
FloppieTheBanjoClown
The Skunkworks
229
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 23:02:00 -
[60] - Quote
Imagine 600 pilots all feeding their manual control inputs to the server, and the server having to process all that information and feed it back to those 600 pilots.
Fast-paced multiplayer games have player caps for a reason. |
|
Saul Perry
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 23:14:00 -
[61] - Quote
Everyone hates this idea and everytime I see it suggested, everyone always does.
That said, I think many of you are wrong about all the 'lore' related reasons for not doing this.
Yes, you might be the captain and not the 'helmsman' but you are also a capsuleer, and your thoughts are supposed to translate into near immediate ship response. In other words you should be able to control the ship a lot more immediately than any captain relaying orders to a helmsman.
On that note, I have given conning orders on a warship (in RL) and I remember once, for fun, taking the helm when a buddy of mine had the watch. The whole time I was thinking -- geez, sometimes I wish I could just push the helmsman out of the way and do this myself. Impossible of course, as the bridge of most modern day warships doesn't afford the helmsman as good a perspective as the officer of the watch but still, sometimes it would be nice to have immediate control. And that's on a 4000 ton warship that reacts a lot slower than most ships in eve.
Speaking of this, many of the biggest ships in the world actually have helm controls on the bridge wings that the captain will use when coming alongside, going through tight passages, etc. In those situations, they want immediate control.
Again, there may be technical challenges in game for straightforward joystick control and I wouldn't want that anyways, as eve is not really a dogfighting game.
What I WOULD like, however, is a wider range of keyboard navigation commands, perhaps even complicated maneuvers.
Heck, there are plenty of times when I know I need transversal that I just end up fumbling around to change my heading at 90 degrees. even if the WASD keys just emulated mouse clicks at 30 degree variations.
So, if you needed to change heading 90 degrees to startboard, a quick triple press of d. I think stuff like that would allow reflexive heading changes while I am doing more important things with the mouse. |
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 23:23:00 -
[62] - Quote
Tippia wrote:He said hundreds of transactions a second per player. So let's say 20,000,000 total. If so, that would an 800,000% increase
Oh lol. If that's what he meant, that's just absurd. It can't possibly exceed one transaction per second. That's how frequently CCP cycles. But presumably most players at any given time aren't in a ship moving around at all at any given time and most of those who are aren't adjusting their steering in any given second. So it would actually only be a fraction of a fraction of the number of players online at any given time. I think 500 players adjusting their steering per second is probably on the high side. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
1148
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 23:28:00 -
[63] - Quote
Teamosil wrote:Oh lol. If that's what he meant, that's just absurd. It can't possibly exceed one transaction per second. That's how frequently CCP cycles. I think that was the point: to get any kind of value out of a direct control scheme, you have to update your movement far more often, and transmit and process a massively increased amount of data, and that would just breakGǪ wellGǪ everything. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 23:29:00 -
[64] - Quote
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:Fast-paced multiplayer games have player caps for a reason.
Yeah, no doubt. But I don't think anybody was suggesting that they make EvE into a fast paced multiplayer game. Ships in eve take seconds just to execute a turn and sometimes minutes to approach an object and whatnot. If CCP were to like totally scuttle the game and make a first person shooter style space combat element instead, yeah, that'd be a very different question, but that isn't the same thing. IMO implementing WASD would basically just make W a hotkey for double clicking straight in front of your ship, A for double clicking off to the left, etc. At least that's the idea I'm responding to, not like trying to make it into Descent or something. |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
195
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 23:29:00 -
[65] - Quote
Also mind you i rather see other things first such as line of sight put into play for shooting instead of very cumbersome joystick control.
I am very sure I can spin click a spot in space extremly faster than any joy stick jockey ever could. |
baltec1
176
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 23:36:00 -
[66] - Quote
Vertisce Soritenshi wrote:Basically you want control using WASD. I fully support this. Double clicking in space is lame and while doable not better than WASD. Anybody saying that this would cause server lag/issues, whatever...is full of ****. Last time I checked Star Trek online does it and it worked fine. In fact every other space MMO I have ever played has done it. Not to mention it really isn't any different than MMO's that are on the ground doing the same thing. They seem to have no problem. Calling out CCP for being lazy on this one. Make both methods an option at all times...problem solved.
+1
If Star Trek Online ever had to handle a fight involving 200 ships it would melt. EVE has managed fights with 3000+.
|
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 23:37:00 -
[67] - Quote
Tippia wrote:I think that was the point: to get any kind of value out of a direct control scheme, you have to update your movement far more often, and transmit and process a massively increased amount of data, and that would just breakGǪ wellGǪ everything.
Fair enough. I guess we're both describing two sides of the same coin maybe. I'm saying "sure it would be possible, but it would be lame" and you're saying "to make it not lame would be impossible". :) |
Syrinx Verrall
Xeno Labs
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 23:38:00 -
[68] - Quote
Saul Perry wrote:Everyone hates this idea and everytime I see it suggested, everyone always does.
That said, I think many of you are wrong about all the 'lore' related reasons for not doing this.
Yes, you might be the captain and not the 'helmsman' but you are also a capsuleer, and your thoughts are supposed to translate into near immediate ship response. In other words you should be able to control the ship a lot more immediately than any captain relaying orders to a helmsman.
True enough, but you're still issuing a command to 'go thattaway' rather than pushing a stick or turning a wheel until the ship is facing the way you want. A capsuleer is like a captain with an instantly responsive helmsman, but she's still a captain.
Still, lore-wise, a capsuleer should be able to tell the ship something along the lines of 'pitch up and yaw left at max rate until I say stop'.
Though given that all the damage system cares about is transverse velocity, evasive maneuvers kind of lose their charm.
|
mkint
247
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 00:02:00 -
[69] - Quote
Teamosil wrote:Tippia wrote:I think that was the point: to get any kind of value out of a direct control scheme, you have to update your movement far more often, and transmit and process a massively increased amount of data, and that would just breakGǪ wellGǪ everything. Fair enough. I guess we're both describing two sides of the same coin maybe. I'm saying "sure it would be possible, but it would be lame" and you're saying "to make it not lame would be impossible". :) I'm glad tippia is making my points for me, because I'm really not feeling eloquent today. :P
Adding shortcuts for double-clicking, based on camera position, might not be a bad idea, except I'm sure it'd just end up confusing rookies, send logi's veering off in random directions (already seems to happen lots anyway), and maybe get a lot of extra keyboard spam to the server. Not saying it's necessarily a bad idea. Better than direct stick/rudder anyway. Better than the existing awful "new shortcuts" by far. |
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation The Honda Accord
246
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 00:08:00 -
[70] - Quote
So could Eve become a "flight sim". Not likely for a whole ton of reason related to scaling and the underlying architcture of Eve.
Could Eve have an options joystick navigation UI? Definitely! I'd love it if it did! It could allow you to orient your ship like you can now by double clicking and I think would be a lot more intutive. You could even interface the extended buttons on most joysticks to do things like target cycling and other tasks already supported on the keyboard. Would it make Eve a twitch based space comabt game? Nope, same game, same ship movement speeds as before, just mapping what double click does now to the joystick.
Before someone shouts "that can't work!! Lag!! Sever blah blah blah blah! Bandwidth blah blah blah!" I am not saying anything between the client and server would change, just that the navigation input that you do now with the mouse and keyboard could be mapped to the joystick to make pointing your ship and moving it more intuitive. It would still happen a tick a second and be effectively the same as mouse and keyboard are now.
I know I'd love that as an option.
Issler |
|
mkint
247
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 00:22:00 -
[71] - Quote
Issler Dainze wrote:So could Eve become a "flight sim". Not likely for a whole ton of reason related to scaling and the underlying architcture of Eve.
Could Eve have an options joystick navigation UI? Definitely! I'd love it if it did! It could allow you to orient your ship like you can now by double clicking and I think would be a lot more intutive. You could even interface the extended buttons on most joysticks to do things like target cycling and other tasks already supported on the keyboard. Would it make Eve a twitch based space comabt game? Nope, same game, same ship movement speeds as before, just mapping what double click does now to the joystick.
Before someone shouts "that can't work!! Lag!! Sever blah blah blah blah! Bandwidth blah blah blah!" I am not saying anything between the client and server would change, just that the navigation input that you do now with the mouse and keyboard could be mapped to the joystick to make pointing your ship and moving it more intuitive. It would still happen a tick a second and be effectively the same as mouse and keyboard are now.
I know I'd love that as an option.
Issler I don't think it would play how you think think it would play.
Firstly, it would still spam the server with commands. Not as many as direct control, but an additional 1 per second movement command that an orbit or keep at range command would not be issuing. That would add up in big fights.
Secondly, ignoring that, it would still take a fairly complicated implementation to make it feel right. Get in space in a big slow ship and start playing around with the movement physics. Do some warps, some aligning in various directions relative to your current vector, some stop commands, etc. It's a learning experience in itself. Mapping it so it *feels* like you're controlling the ship with your joystick would take some real tweaking. And the reward would ultimately be a less playable game (the whole point of joystick control is supposedly to control what's happening on the battlefield, except would require your perspective to be that reduces situational awareness.) Sounds like a bad investment to me. |
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation The Honda Accord
246
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 00:46:00 -
[72] - Quote
mkint wrote:Issler Dainze wrote:So could Eve become a "flight sim". Not likely for a whole ton of reason related to scaling and the underlying architcture of Eve.
Could Eve have an options joystick navigation UI? Definitely! I'd love it if it did! It could allow you to orient your ship like you can now by double clicking and I think would be a lot more intutive. You could even interface the extended buttons on most joysticks to do things like target cycling and other tasks already supported on the keyboard. Would it make Eve a twitch based space comabt game? Nope, same game, same ship movement speeds as before, just mapping what double click does now to the joystick.
Before someone shouts "that can't work!! Lag!! Sever blah blah blah blah! Bandwidth blah blah blah!" I am not saying anything between the client and server would change, just that the navigation input that you do now with the mouse and keyboard could be mapped to the joystick to make pointing your ship and moving it more intuitive. It would still happen a tick a second and be effectively the same as mouse and keyboard are now.
I know I'd love that as an option.
Issler I don't think it would play how you think think it would play. Firstly, it would still spam the server with commands. Not as many as direct control, but an additional 1 per second movement command that an orbit or keep at range command would not be issuing. That would add up in big fights. Secondly, ignoring that, it would still take a fairly complicated implementation to make it feel right. Get in space in a big slow ship and start playing around with the movement physics. Do some warps, some aligning in various directions relative to your current vector, some stop commands, etc. It's a learning experience in itself. Mapping it so it *feels* like you're controlling the ship with your joystick would take some real tweaking. And the reward would ultimately be a less playable game (the whole point of joystick control is supposedly to control what's happening on the battlefield, except would require your perspective to be that reduces situational awareness.) Sounds like a bad investment to me.
Cool, someone that has never done game development for a living making a lot or wrong assumptions. What I propose would not change server traffic in any way. The client would integrate the joystick input calculate the equivalent keyboard input to the server amd send it just like it was done on the keyboard. Slow to move ships will move slowly just like they do now.
This isn't a "magical Eve becomes flight sim experience". This is a joystick interface to a navigation console experience. All done client side with the same client to server command streams and feedback traffic that exists today. And commands only go out when there is a change needed so "not one every second". It might even be as simple as the joystick moves the camera with some "ghost reticle" of the ship outline and then the trigger selects the vector and commands the ship forward just like the double click on the mouse.
It isn't intended to feel like direct control, it is an alternative to camera control and flight vector/velocity selection that already exists today. I think it might be more intuitive. This would be a suppliment to the current ship navigation keyboard and mouse UI we have today.
Just because you wouldn't like it doesn't mean other folks wouldnt. So don't go overdesigning my suggested UI!
Issler
|
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
195
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 00:50:00 -
[73] - Quote
Why would I need a fighter pilot stick to fly a boat? |
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation The Honda Accord
246
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 00:59:00 -
[74] - Quote
Nova Fox wrote:Why would I need a fighter pilot stick to fly a boat?
A joystick is generally considered a better input device for navigating a 3D space than a 2D device like a mouse.
Issler |
mkint
247
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 01:11:00 -
[75] - Quote
Issler Dainze wrote:Nova Fox wrote:Why would I need a fighter pilot stick to fly a boat? A joystick is generally considered a better input device for navigating a 3D space than a 2D device like a mouse. Issler A joystick is a 3D device? Pretty sure if you take one apart, you'll find only 2 potentiometers controlling the X and Y axis, i.e. 2 dimensions. Maybe you'll find a 3rd one or a switch controlling a twist in the z-axis on select models. Granted, it's been quite a few years since I took one apart to make a custom flight yoke, but I'm still fairly certain the technology hasn't been completely rewriten.
And you were accusing me of ignorance.
edit: a lot of joysticks also have a potentiometer for throttle, usually separate from the stick part of a joystick, sometimes on a completely separate device. |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
195
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 01:28:00 -
[76] - Quote
Last I checked most stellar naval vessels manually typed in heading verses current telemetry or used twin joysticks to on smaller ships. |
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation The Honda Accord
246
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 01:30:00 -
[77] - Quote
mkint wrote:Issler Dainze wrote:Nova Fox wrote:Why would I need a fighter pilot stick to fly a boat? A joystick is generally considered a better input device for navigating a 3D space than a 2D device like a mouse. Issler A joystick is a 3D device? Pretty sure if you take one apart, you'll find only 2 potentiometers controlling the X and Y axis, i.e. 2 dimensions. Maybe you'll find a 3rd one or a switch controlling a twist in the z-axis on select models. Granted, it's been quite a few years since I took one apart to make a custom flight yoke, but I'm still fairly certain the technology hasn't been completely rewriten. And you were accusing me of ignorance. edit: a lot of joysticks also have a potentiometer for throttle, usually separate from the stick part of a joystick, sometimes on a completely separate device.
Majority of joysticks today integrate yaw via twisting the stick so that is what I am referencing here. Throttle is also often included in some form which would map to ship velocity very well. They also almost always have some stick mounted buttons including a top "hat" switch whic could be usefull for camera control or other functions like weapons/target cycling.
So, yes, very much better for 3D nav than a mouse.
Issler |
Amro One
One.
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 01:52:00 -
[78] - Quote
Your ship is controlled with your mind, hint the pod a matrix plug in on the neck.
|
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 01:56:00 -
[79] - Quote
mkint wrote:[quote=Issler Dainze]A joystick is a 3D device? Pretty sure if you take one apart, you'll find only 2 potentiometers controlling the X and Y axis, i.e. 2 dimensions. Maybe you'll find a 3rd one or a switch controlling a twist in the z-axis on select models.
edit: a lot of joysticks also have a potentiometer for throttle, usually separate from the stick part of a joystick, sometimes on a completely separate device.
This little dohickey is kind of a 3d joystick. You can use it on it's own or use it with one hand while you use the mouse with your other hand. I got to play around with one that a co-worker had once and it was pretty cool. He used it with a mouse and basically just used the spacenavigator to provide the third dimension, but apparently you can use it alone for all three dimensions.
http://www.3dconnexion.com/products/spacenavigator.html |
SilentSkills
Estrale Frontiers
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 02:10:00 -
[80] - Quote
Nova Fox wrote:Also ships in eve use gravity pull drives, those vents do not contrinbute to ship speed but to ship cooling instead. cooling with what? |
|
baltec1
176
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 09:21:00 -
[81] - Quote
SilentSkills wrote:Nova Fox wrote:Also ships in eve use gravity pull drives, those vents do not contrinbute to ship speed but to ship cooling instead. cooling with what?
Space is a liquid. |
T-Jay Charante
The Scope Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 11:09:00 -
[82] - Quote
Only bads play EvE, introduce twitch based play and 90% of the population would quit. |
CausticS0da
Viziam Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 12:14:00 -
[83] - Quote
T-Jay Charante wrote:Only bads play EvE, introduce twitch based play and 90% of the population would quit.
As if this thread wasn't already ridiculous enough, then someone says that...
FAtard OP is trying to destroy eve with his Wow/fps refugee disciples. The current control method is perfect IMO... Do some fleet pvp and this becomes abundantly clear.
Even if it could be done by CCP I wouldn't want it. |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
195
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 12:19:00 -
[84] - Quote
SilentSkills wrote:Nova Fox wrote:Also ships in eve use gravity pull drives, those vents do not contrinbute to ship speed but to ship cooling instead. cooling with what?
Forcible transmission of heat.
All of our reactors does create excess thermics that have to be handeled. Capacitors as well. |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
195
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 12:21:00 -
[85] - Quote
You want the ultimate lore reason why we dont have flight sticks.
Drum roll.....
We use thoughts to control the ship not flight sticks! |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
354
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 13:15:00 -
[86] - Quote
Teamosil wrote:Wow, a lot of flametards on this thread...
All the technical reasons people are posting about why it isn't possible are bs. Of course CCP could solve the problem if they wanted to go in that way. They use WASD in WiS for example. It might require changing or supplementing the architecture a bit or maybe not, but it's certainly not impossible.
Yes, and they can't get walking in stations to work properly with more than person.
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
354
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 13:18:00 -
[87] - Quote
T-Jay Charante wrote:Only bads play EvE, introduce twitch based play and 90% of the population would quit.
Yes, and if you introduced point and click style gameplay into Call of Duty, 90% of its players would quit.
It's a case of horses for courses old chap, and the current control system is the perfect horse for the the Eve course. Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
Vertisce Soritenshi
SHADOW WARD
147
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 13:35:00 -
[88] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:SilentSkills wrote:Nova Fox wrote:Also ships in eve use gravity pull drives, those vents do not contrinbute to ship speed but to ship cooling instead. cooling with what? Space is a liquid.
lol...no... Support our boobies!-áLINKY! |
Di Mulle
23
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 14:25:00 -
[89] - Quote
Teamosil wrote:
Your argument would only be relevant if they were only serving one client. They have thousands of clients, so you have multiple clients per CPU. Add more CPUs, fewer clients per CPU.
Now your argument would be valid if CPU worked per set number of clients. Alas, it works per set number of solar systems. Are there one pilot, or 2000, it is still the same one CPU. Rewriting that will be way more work than optimizing database you talk so much.
Teamosil wrote:I don't think you followed what I'm saying. I'm saying the database could be perfectly optimized right now for double click based navigation, but it could be that a different optimization would be better for WASD. Again, that's something there is no way you or I could possibly know without being very deep in the code and database design.
And what exactly changes in a nature of stored data and the way you work with it, be it current system or WASD ? It is all the same essentially, just need to be performed n times more frequent.
Teamosil wrote:mkint wrote:The server can handle a maximum of 1 movement command per second. Adding WASD or especially stick/rudder would be throwing hundreds of movement command per second. From thousands of pilots. All on the same CPU. And trying to do the extra collisions and stuff that's generated on top of it. Hundreds of commands a second would be like a 10% increase in their load. If that. That's my point. They're already doing one set of transactions per second for every pilot in space, and I bet every pilot online. No, not all on the same CPU... Not sure where you get that idea from. They run a cluster of servers, each with two CPUs. The load is spread across all those. 120 CPUs last update I saw.
Again, all the pilots in one node are on the same one CPU. While I don't think transaction may increase dramatically - there is probably little point to go below 0.1 sec cycle because of an average ping, we still have about 10 times increase in updates sent, and certain calculations probably increase in a square way, making it up to 100 times. That is surely big enough number for a quite little gain.
I am in no way a database expert, but basic logic tells that there will be no specific optimization, because the very nature of processes remain the same - just their numbers increase. Or, in other words, optimization valid for current state is as well good for WASD.
Teamosil wrote: But presumably most players at any given time aren't in a ship moving around at all at any given time and most of those who are aren't adjusting their steering in any given second. About half of pilots seem to be docked at any given time and most those in space are mining or scanning or in warp or just sitting there chatting or waiting at a gate or whatever. And given that many ships take several seconds just to execute a single turn, you presumably wouldn't need to be making adjustments more than every few seconds even if you are really active about it. So it would actually only be a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of the number of players online at any given time. I think 500 players adjusting their steering per second is probably on the high side.
Heh, for an expert you lacking some basic logic there again. It does not matter whether ship is changing steering or no. In order to "know" it, you still need to check for an input at every cycle.
And, btw, docked pilots do not count at that game. They are on completely different nodes. CCP is unable to implement simpliest things. Like settting to hide signatures. So they sweep it under a rug . Children do that in their pre-shool years, CCP does it being adults. Probably because it is fearless enough. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
95
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 14:41:00 -
[90] - Quote
I don't see the Descent patch hitting live any time soon. CSM do you think? No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
|
Barbelo Valentinian
The Scope Gallente Federation
119
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 15:05:00 -
[91] - Quote
Hung TuLo wrote:Is there some reason why EVE does not use stick and rudder space flying? Yes I realize that there is no Air/Oxygen in space but that does not mean the afterburners/Microwarpdrives could not be directional.
To me it would cause a great many more technical battles to occur
Just my thoughts.
Try STO, that has fantastic WASD + up/down manual flying and combat - pity the rest of the game isn't really up to scratch, but the ship-to-ship is hella fun and extremely addictive.
It's really like a 3-d version of naval combat as in POTBS, and tactical maneouvering counts for a lot (e.g. you have weps on front, rear and two sides, with firing arcs).
Nothing like maneouvering at an angle to fire front guns, swinging around majestically to fire a broadside, and then shooting a photon torpedo out of your arse for good measure Also lots of tactical choices to be made in which "officers" and modules to skill for and field too.
For my tastes, the ultimate space-game would have "dogfight"-like mechanics for frigates and cruisers, STO-style ship-to-ship for BCs and BSs, and some sort of as-current EVE-like system for capitals and supercapitals, but where it would require teamwork to fly and fight in a capital or supercapital. |
Hung TuLo
Universal Fleet Operations Fatal Ascension
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 15:06:00 -
[92] - Quote
CausticS0da wrote:T-Jay Charante wrote:Only bads play EvE, introduce twitch based play and 90% of the population would quit. As if this thread wasn't already ridiculous enough, then someone says that... FAtard OP is trying to destroy eve with his Wow/fps refugee disciples. The current control method is perfect IMO... Do some fleet pvp and this becomes abundantly clear. Even if it could be done by CCP I wouldn't want it.
I love it how everyone thinks they know me, or what I have played or have done. The OP had a question to ask. I didn not troll. I didn't not act in any certain way.
The statement that says that its always been this way and that people should just accept that shold make people realize that if its been done this way dont change it. Don't change anything in the game. Don't change the dynamics, the ships, the mechanics, nothings.
Change is always a neccesary thing. It allows the best to come out of the person involved in the change from the developer to the person playing the game. No change no challenge.
I do PVP and in fleets. There are times when it makes sense to not use a stick and rudder. But there are also times when a stick and rudder makes the game more challenging. "In space all warriors are cold warriors" ----á General Chang-á Star Trek VI |
Hung TuLo
Universal Fleet Operations Fatal Ascension
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 15:13:00 -
[93] - Quote
Everyone ,
Please reread what I asked. I asked why wasn't it in the game. That is all, that is all I asked. I am perfectly fine with it not being, while I think it would be more challenging I am not adovcating it.
I have played STO, and I like it up to a point. The game is very limiting. EVE is truely dynamic. In so many ways that I could not even come close to describing them all.
"In space all warriors are cold warriors" ----á General Chang-á Star Trek VI |
Jenshae Chiroptera
95
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 15:17:00 -
[94] - Quote
I like EVE due to how it moves while flying. I agree that I would not want the twitch or WASD controls in this game. CSM do you think? No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
E man Industries
SeaChell Productions
115
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 15:26:00 -
[95] - Quote
how fast would holding down "A" make you turn?
100% speed? 80% 50%
what would eb your orbit radius of holding "A"? 1km, 5, 10, 60?
clicking and the comands offer much more control than holding "a" it just not as simple. I have actually Un-subbed my acounts, We need more to do, not more to wear. E-mail me when CCP has decent content a casual player can access in a 1-2h play period that is actually fun and contributes to long term goals. |
T-Jay Charante
The Scope Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 15:35:00 -
[96] - Quote
E man Industries wrote:how fast would holding down "A" make you turn?
100% speed? 80% 50%
what would eb your orbit radius of holding "A"? 1km, 5, 10, 60?
clicking and the comands offer much more control than holding "a" it just not as simple.
Yep, it's like having stabilizers on space ships. Much more control. It suits the skill level of the player base.
|
Ciar Meara
Virtus Vindice
210
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 15:38:00 -
[97] - Quote
Ferrenc wrote:please forgive my ignorance on this one, but why cant ccp just buy a bunch of new hardware? is that not the problem? why cant lag be solved that way? if someone could give me like a really brief explanation of this it would be much appreciated
Yes, you solved the problem. Moar hardware will always solve anything, the way the game is programmed and actually sends commands and processes those commands have no impact on these things. All you need is moar hardware.
WASD movement isn't the way to go, I am not holding down the Z key on my keyboard (azerty) non stop so twitch based players can feel like they have more control. There is plenty of room for speed, precision and piloting when flying frigates with the mouse. (or even cruisers) - [img]http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/janus/ceosig.jpg[/img] [yellow]English only please. Zymurgist[/yellow] |
Jekyl Eraser
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 15:50:00 -
[98] - Quote
Good idea. Just like the new shortcut keys. But knowing CCP they will require you to douleclick AND WSAD to turn. Kinda like the new shortcuts require to press key AND click instead of just click.
This thread is an orwellian nightmare. |
Chi Ftele
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 16:02:00 -
[99] - Quote
having that kind of flying in eve would be a massive failure
try playing independence war 2 to get a feeling of how hard it is to fly like that and why autocontrol, as it is implemented in eve is actually a blessing That is all. |
MNagy
Yo-Mama Quixotic Hegemony
27
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 16:08:00 -
[100] - Quote
Stick and rudder space flying would also put a super hamper on information being sent from you to the client and back and probably add to a bunch of lag.
neat idea, but the double click thing probably reduces a lot of lag as its a 'point - double click - and server does the rest till you double click again.' |
|
Barakkus
1005
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 16:18:00 -
[101] - Quote
All the people going on and on about performance, it's probably not a hardware issue on the cluster, but a complete re-coding of the movement portion of the client and positional synchronization code on the server. You all have to realize that not every single node in the cluster runs all solar systems all the time too. I don't see a problem with the hardware honestly after following a lot of the blogs on what TQ actually runs on, especially since there are a number of games where you can get 1000+ players running around killing each other in the same place and TQ has the same level of hardware if not better than a lot of other MMOs on the market.
It's something which is not really going to be budgeted for, like ever. There's a lot better things to be spending money on at the moment, and I think something like that is at the bottom of the priority list, if it was ever considered to begin with. |
ConXtionS
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Cascade Imminent
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 16:51:00 -
[102] - Quote
For me... I admitt I would enjoy the abililty for actually "FLY" my ship even if it was not a perfect space physics. However for miners and I am sure others, it would be just as nice to have the CHOICE to let the ship do the work.
Just my thoughts
Con |
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 18:59:00 -
[103] - Quote
Di Mulle wrote:Now your argument would be valid if CPU worked per set number of clients. Alas, it works per set number of solar systems. Are there one pilot, or 2000, it is still the same one CPU. Rewriting that will be way more work than optimizing database you talk so much.
That doesn't quite add up. There isn't one dedicated CPU per solar system. CPUs run many solar systems. They have a total of 120 CPUs, but thousands of systems. So, more CPUs means fewer systems per CPU means fewer pilots per CPU.
Di Mulle wrote:I am in no way a database expert, but basic logic tells that there will be no specific optimization, because the very nature of processes remain the same - just their numbers increase. Or, in other words, optimization valid for current state is as well good for WASD.
That doesn't really follow either. For example, maybe if you have relatively infrequent updates to location info, but you have a frequent need to access that information you might want to index the field, where if you have very frequent updates, but infrequent access to the data, then you might not want to index it. If you are always looking up location information in combination with specific other fields after the change you might want to change your index to tie those fields together, etc. "Basic logic" isn't a very useful tool for guessing at database optimization. It's way complicated stuff.
Di Mulle wrote:Heh, for an expert you lacking some basic logic there again. It does not matter whether ship is changing steering or no. In order to "know" it, you still need to check for an input at every cycle.
That doesn't follow either. The client would need to check for input constantly but it would not necessarily need to send a "no new news" update to the server.
But I absolutely never claimed to be an expert. My overriding point is that none of us are experts in it. Only probably a relatively short list of developers at CCP would have any foundation to actually say what a change like that would require, so all the "thats impossible!" posts here, IMO, are ridiculous. Very few things in software development are impossible and that certainly isn't a conclusion one could reach confidently without knowing radically more than anybody on this thread does. |
Di Mulle
23
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 21:47:00 -
[104] - Quote
Teamosil wrote:
That doesn't quite add up. There isn't one dedicated CPU per solar system. CPUs run many solar systems. They have a total of 120 CPUs, but thousands of systems. So, more CPUs means fewer systems per CPU means fewer pilots per CPU.
Well, maybe iI got your wording wrong. But the thing I wanted to say is that reinforced node means solar system already has a dedicated sole CPU, and adding furter CPU's can't help in any way, if load will increase because of more frequent updates.
Teamosil wrote:That doesn't really follow either. For example, maybe if you have relatively infrequent updates to location info, but you have a frequent need to access that information you might want to index the field, where if you have very frequent updates, but infrequent access to the data, then you might not want to index it. If you are always looking up location information in combination with specific other fields after the change you might want to change your index to tie those fields together, etc. "Basic logic" isn't a very useful tool for guessing at database optimization. It's way complicated stuff.
That probably may be valid points.
Teamosil wrote:Di Mulle wrote:Heh, for an expert you lacking some basic logic there again. It does not matter whether ship is changing steering or no. In order to "know" it, you still need to check for an input at every cycle. That doesn't follow either. The client would need to check for input constantly but it would not necessarily need to send a "no new news" update to the server.
But the server still needs to check for input, even if there none was sent. Client may start updates any time, you can't assume you can keep client unattended even if it was inactive for a previous hour. Also, assume your ship just stays on a stable vector without any further input. You still need to recalculate position at the server at the every cycle and resend information to the client to keep it in sync. Not even speaking you need to check for collision at every cycle.
Teamosil wrote: Only probably a relatively short list of developers at CCP would have any foundation to actually say what a change like that would require, so all the "thats impossible!" posts here, IMO, are ridiculous. Very few things in software development are impossible and that certainly isn't a conclusion one could reach confidently without knowing radically more than anybody on this thread does.
I assume we need to understand it as not "absolutely impossible", but as practically impossible within certain budgeting restraints (which we are not exactly aware of, but can make some guesses). I imagine such undertaking would be something on the scale of Incarna. While Incarna probably needs way more code and assets created, they are not so critical to existing ones, they can coexist. While proposed change need modifying of the very foundation, therefore more risky.
CCP is unable to implement simpliest things. Like settting to hide signatures. So they sweep it under a rug . Children do that in their pre-shool years, CCP does it being adults. Probably because it is fearless enough. |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Industrial Complex Cosmic Consortium
263
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 21:25:00 -
[105] - Quote
I personally don't like the "double-click to move" paradigm of the EVE UI. I'd prefer to have some other way of setting and visualising the ship's movement vector. It would be especially nice to be able to see when your planned movement has changed due to accidentally indicating to the UI that you want to "approach" that thing that you were just trying to target.
|
Nariya Kentaya
Celestial Ascension
57
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 06:26:00 -
[106] - Quote
Teamosil wrote:Di Mulle wrote:Now your argument would be valid if CPU worked per set number of clients. Alas, it works per set number of solar systems. Are there one pilot, or 2000, it is still the same one CPU. Rewriting that will be way more work than optimizing database you talk so much. That doesn't quite add up. There isn't one dedicated CPU per solar system. CPUs run many solar systems. They have a total of 120 CPUs, but thousands of systems. So, more CPUs means fewer systems per CPU means fewer pilots per CPU.
he was saying that in most instances, the point where the server load becomes a problem is when 2000+ players are all fighting in the same system, which emans even if wevery other system that CPU was in charge of was empty, it would still lag immensely, even if you had 1 CPU for every system, you still have 2000 players on that CPU causing problems and lagging. so basically, no matter how many "cpus" you have, your still putting relatively the same amount of load on a single serveer that isnt any better then when the cpu supported multiple systems. |
Pok Nibin
Viziam Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 06:31:00 -
[107] - Quote
Hung TuLo wrote:Is there some reason why EVE does not use stick and rudder space flying? Yes I realize that there is no Air/Oxygen in space but that does not mean the afterburners/Microwarpdrives could not be directional.
To me it would cause a great many more technical battles to occur
Just my thoughts. -10 elementary physics phail
Don't fight it.-á Rejoin your Amarrian patriarchs.-á You know you want to. |
Vertisce Soritenshi
SHADOW WARD
162
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:37:00 -
[108] - Quote
Pok Nibin wrote:Hung TuLo wrote:Is there some reason why EVE does not use stick and rudder space flying? Yes I realize that there is no Air/Oxygen in space but that does not mean the afterburners/Microwarpdrives could not be directional.
To me it would cause a great many more technical battles to occur
Just my thoughts. -10 elementary physics phail
lol...what? If anything it is the physics in EvE that fail. But that's for another thread. Support our boobies!-áLINKY! |
Richard Aiel
Point of No Return Waterboard
27
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:27:00 -
[109] - Quote
mkint wrote:This idea is, and always has been pants-on-head-ruhtarded. No, your idea is not unique. It's still just as stupid an idea as when everyone else has posted it. Learn the basic game mechanics. Do the tutorials. THEN make stupid suggestions here.
Except they do it in Black Prophesy, so the IDEA isnt that stupid, it just is with CCP's framework.
"If the unfaithful would rage-quit, let them do so. And let not the gates of New Eden strike them 'pon the ass ere they leave." Quoth the Hillmar |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
226
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 08:43:00 -
[110] - Quote
Ill tell you what is stupid, Getting flight stick controls and nothing else.
In a day and age where we have joysticks that have 22 buttons on them having just flight stick control and no interaction between that and aiming guns would lead to the "give a mouse a cookie and he'd want a glass of milk complex."
Net result would arise and the massive nerf bat will descend from the heavens and made you wished you never came up with the idea in the first place, then youll have players complain that joystick users have and extremly unfair advantage over laptoppers who cannot afford the sticks.
|
|
Imryn Xaran
Coherent Light Enterprises
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 09:18:00 -
[111] - Quote
I don't know why anyone would think this is a good idea. "Stick & rudder" type controls might be fine for controlling an aircraft but would be completely useless for a spacecraft. The way that a change of direction is achieved is completely different and does not equate at all. The only RL spaceship to use a stick for in-space navigation was the lunar module and it took the pilots months of training to "un-learn" all of their "stick & rudder" reactions to be able to fly it. And those were NASA test pilots so good luck mate.
RL spacecraft use a keyboard for navigation inputs. Sci-fi shows that have been properly thought out use a keyboard for navigation inputs. If you think about it, space combat would involve tracking and engaging targets moving at massive velocities and huge ranges and would therefore be entirely dependent on computer support. No place for pathetically slow "fast twitch" human reactions.
There are plenty of space combat games available that treat spaceships like aircraft and use stick controls so why not go play one of those? EVE takes a more "realistic" approach to so many aspects of space travel and combat, it would be a shame to dumb it down in this way. |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
229
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 09:23:00 -
[112] - Quote
I real interface for a space ship would probably be a holo orb where you just drag and drop the pointer on the sphere, oh wait we already do that in eve.
And we dont rotate because we set telemtery based on the eliptical of the system I mean seriously everything interesting in a system is along the elptical.
Up direction was probably decided by concord though though there can be a scinentific 'up' in a galaxy IE pointed away from center of universe.
|
Ivan Joukov
Astromechanica Maxima Astromechanica Federatis
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 10:34:00 -
[113] - Quote
Eve isn't about piloting ships like fighters, it's about commanding heavy ships. Joystick control would be pointless I do not play a shooter.
-áDavai!
|
Vertisce Soritenshi
Varion Galactic Tragedy.
198
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 15:18:00 -
[114] - Quote
Ivan Joukov wrote: Eve isn't about piloting ships like fighters, it's about commanding heavy ships. Joystick control would be pointless I do not play a shooter.
The point isn't to make the game a shooter...its to have more finely tuned control over your ship and its direction. I would mind less if the click in space function worked a lot better than it does. As it is you click in space and you start moving in the "general, not quite but somewhat close" direction of where you clicked. Support our boobies!-áLINKY! |
Stonecold Steve
I N E X T R E M I S Fidelas Constans
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 15:32:00 -
[115] - Quote
Buy a joystick and a G14 keyboard, you should find that frigate flying suddenly becomes alot more fun "Dat veniam corvis, vexat censura columbas"- The censor forgives the crows and harasses the doves. GÇ£Quod licet Iovi non licet boviGÇ¥- Gods may do what cattle may not. "Amat victoria curam"- Victory favours those who take pains. |
InVictus Kell
The Scope Gallente Federation
66
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 15:33:00 -
[116] - Quote
Remember the Star Trek movie where a joystick appears and the Enterprise actually gets piloted by it?
remember how much that sucked? not the best example, since the whole movie was really bad too, but i associate like this frequently for convenience. So if EVE gets joystick control, i'll have the same reaction, only this time i dont think the judge will just hand out community service. |
Xavier Holtzman
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 15:51:00 -
[117] - Quote
Hung TuLo wrote:Is there some reason why EVE does not use stick and rudder space flying? Yes I realize that there is no Air/Oxygen in space but that does not mean the afterburners/Microwarpdrives could not be directional.
To me it would cause a great many more technical battles to occur
Just my thoughts.
I venture to guess that the reason why EVE does not use stick and rudder space flying is because the majority of the EVE population does not want to use the stick and rudder system (including me). |
Astrid Stjerna
Teraa Matar
91
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 16:32:00 -
[118] - Quote
Hung TuLo wrote:Karl Planck wrote:Try doing more frigate fights. Most larger ship battles do not depend on maneuvering well. Do you more frig fights and begin to learn the glory of manual piloting in eve Ok but your talking about pointing in space and doing double clicks. I am talking about holding down keys for your movement. the longer you hold down the key the more you move in the direction. Same if you had a key for momentum or speed. The turning radius of your ship would show a slower change due to the size ofthe ship. The space battles would depend more on the individual than the warp in of the ship.
I like the idea of WASD flight (though i see some potential issues related to re-organizing the keybinds to allow it); having played EVE for a while now, though, I don't think that stick-and-rudder flight in the 'joystick' sense works for a game like EVE. Right now, our combat effectiveness depends on skills and modules, rather than which pilot's reaction time is better.
If the WASD flight was liimited to 'press this key to go in this direction', I'd be happy with it. I just don't think it should be 'hold this key down to fly', because there's too much 'twitch' involved. |
Hung TuLo
Universal Fleet Operations Fatal Ascension
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 16:44:00 -
[119] - Quote
Xavier Holtzman wrote:Hung TuLo wrote:Is there some reason why EVE does not use stick and rudder space flying? Yes I realize that there is no Air/Oxygen in space but that does not mean the afterburners/Microwarpdrives could not be directional.
To me it would cause a great many more technical battles to occur
Just my thoughts. I venture to guess that the reason why EVE does not use stick and rudder space flying is because the majority of the EVE population does not want to use the stick and rudder system (including me).
Which is completely fine. I was just wonding the thinking behind it. "In space all warriors are cold warriors" ----á General Chang-á Star Trek VI |
Mahakaharashi RedEagle
Hedion University Amarr Empire
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 16:57:00 -
[120] - Quote
I think I've red something about early concept of EVE and how they wanted to have direct Elite-like flight model for small to medium ships, supported by physics and maybe even LoS/LoF, but in those times it was impossible to achieve due to hardware and network limitations.
If this is true, then point and click controls are legacy from the past, something that might be too late and too dificult to change now. |
|
Morganta
Peripheral Madness The Midget Mafia
386
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 17:13:00 -
[121] - Quote
yeah stick and rudder is weak for spaceflight
the one guy sort of got it, but missed that all the pre shuttle craft had stick control, not just LEMs, and the bulk of space-faring nations still use capsule configurations with a stick for fine adjustments of the RCS.
these are manual controls, rarely used in flight. I believe the Apollo series of flights needed a manual control input prior to the escape burn, but now a days most spacecraft functions are controlled expressly by computer using pre-programed sequences managed by the DAP.
stick is still used in docking maneuvers and unscheduled maneuvers.
however that said, a space stick is nothing like a flight stick. A flight stick controls the plane by modifying the amount of lift generated across the flight control surfaces (wing, tail and rudder) move the stick left and you create a drag condition on the air that moves under the left wing, reducing lift and dropping the wing
in space if you point the stick left your right RCS thrusters fire propelling you left, to stop you need to apply the same amount of thrust to counter the velocity you created by firing the left RCS thrusters
and the typical single stick controls several axis groups with a switch needed to change the groups the stick actuates
this is far too complex for eve, clicking on a direction in space is a good method for us.
stick is useful for dogfighting in aircraft, there is no dogfighting like that in eve because our weapons have a 360 degree field of fire so there is absolutely no benefit to maneuvering as though you have fixed guns with a 5 degree field, the only things of meaning in eve combat are distance and traversal, and a stick will actually make your life worse as you will be derping around flying in tiny little circles like a dog chasing its tail while a gang sits at 15km chopping you to bits. The American public's reaction to the change was poor and the new cola was a major marketing failure. The subsequent reintroduction of Coke's original formula, re-branded as "Coca-Cola Classic", resulted in a significant gain in sales, leading to speculation that the introduction of the New Coke formula was just a marketing ploy |
Astrid Stjerna
Teraa Matar
93
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 20:14:00 -
[122] - Quote
Barakkus wrote:All the people going on and on about performance, it's probably not a hardware issue on the cluster, but a complete re-coding of the movement portion of the client and positional synchronization code on the server. You all have to realize that not every single node in the cluster runs all solar systems all the time too. I don't see a problem with the hardware honestly after following a lot of the blogs on what TQ actually runs on, especially since there are a number of games where you can get 1000+ players running around killing each other in the same place and TQ has the same level of hardware if not better than a lot of other MMOs on the market.
It's something which is not really going to be budgeted for, like ever. There's a lot better things to be spending money on at the moment, and I think something like that is at the bottom of the priority list, if it was ever considered to begin with.
Actually, I recall reading a long-ago devpost on this very topic. The rationale for not allowing joysticks or keypresses was two-fold:
If I recall the post correctly, CCP tested the game with joysticks, but found that due to the way joysticks handle control data, the number of input events from so many joysticks making calls simultaneously reached a 'critical mass' and caused interface lag while the system tried to clear out the backlog and process the next batch of input requests.
The second line of reasoning was that joysticks would add an undesirable level of 'twitch' gameplay, where victory ultimately depended on hardware instead of game mechanics. |
Gogela
Freeport Exploration
165
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 04:03:00 -
[123] - Quote
I don't think "orbiting" is any more realistic than atmospheric flight in space... it would be cool if you could fly a fighter off a carrier... maybe it could be an entirely different class of combat, say fighter on fighter, when not engaging larger ships.
I can definitely see the technical problem with additional inputs though... can you imagine trying twitch based game-play w/ fleet fight lag? It would drive me crazy and probably **** everyone off... All GëíGêçGëí Ships | Many Odd GëíGêçGëí Items (+Drones) | <-- Links to showInfo in-game |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |