Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Industrial Complex Cosmic Consortium
964
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 06:39:00 -
[31] - Quote
Tarsus Zateki wrote:Remove wreck brackets and you'll be in even better shape.
The lag is not client side. You have a field with a hundred wrecks, a hundred pilots on grid, suddenly the server has to send 10k updates to clients "oh BTW, this wreck has changed ownership".
|
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
1026
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 14:37:00 -
[32] - Quote
Grideris wrote:Mara Rinn wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:Interesting. I would think that if there was an event that caused that large a spike then TiDi would kick in, allowing plenty of time to do whatever. Perhaps TiDi relies on monitoring the sol simulation, while abandoning wrecks is a direct database call which means that the TiDi engine has no opportunity to realise that something is wrong. Sometimes database calls can get messy, to the point that the lag happens before things like "iterate through the wrecks to abandon them" won't help. CCP Veritas or CCP PrizmX (is he still around?) could fill us in on the details. Actually I think it has more to do with the fact that AFAIK TiDi is not active on any Highsec nodes. And I don't know who CCP PrizmX is, but I'm pretty sure that CCP Prism X is still around.
Respectfullly, I don't think that is correct. TiDi, to the best of my knowledge, is fully operational on all nodes now. When I check troll in the dictionary, it has a photo shopped picture of you standing somewhere in the vicinity of a point.
Also, I can kill you with my brain. |
Miss Kerr
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 17:42:00 -
[33] - Quote
Well thats another good question...is TiDi operational on all nodes? Is TiDi operational in high sec? And most importantly (the original reason this thread was started)...Is causing lag by abandoning wrecks a ban-able offence |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
531
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 21:05:00 -
[34] - Quote
Miss Kerr wrote:Well thats another good question...is TiDi operational on all nodes? Is TiDi operational in high sec? And most importantly (the original reason this thread was started)...Is causing lag by abandoning wrecks a ban-able offence Doing anything for the purpose of lagging competitors/enemies/etc out is a bannable offence. The issue lies in detecting whether it was meant to lag you out, and the person is a horrible person who should be banned, or it wasn't meant to lag you out, but it did because you have a ****** computer/connection/CCP Tuxford/etc.
A parallel is spamming gates or bubbles with cans. This can have a legit purpose: preventing cloaking. CCP has confirmed that putting out cans in space is a valid gameplay mechanic for prevenging people from cloaking. However, CCP has also indicated that spamming an obnoxious number of cans is lag-play, and can get you banned. There is no actual "number" of cans that they ban for; it varies case by case, as people petition.
I suspect this is the same deal here. If it happens to you, petition the issue and try to get reimbursed and the person abandoning the cans punished. It would be nice if CCP could confirm that this is the proper course of action in this thread, but it might not happen.
Regardless, if you don't petition they won't help you anyway. So do it! Rifterlings - Small gang lowsec combat corp specializing in frigates and cruisers. US Timezone veterans and newbies alike are welcome to join us. Come chat in the "we fly rifters" in-game channel. |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
43
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 21:36:00 -
[35] - Quote
Abandoning of wrecks&cans should show up in fleet histories so apropriate punishment can be dealt out by the fleet! |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
43
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 21:42:00 -
[36] - Quote
Tarsus Zateki wrote:Wrecks and cans floating in space cause negligible latency hits. You'd have to leave hundreds of them lying around before there was any impact and it would be entirely client side. If your PC can handle an incursion it can handle rendering some wrecks. Remove wreck brackets and you'll be in even better shape.
This ranks up there with the continued idiocy that spamming chat channels in game causes lag.
You are ignorant of the mechanics of abandoning wrecks in large PvE sites its not causing lag on the client side in the TCRC & MoM sites you can get hundreds of these wrecks that can create 10-20 seconds of lag which is enough to kill any logi and almost any non shiney BS ( during a lirsautton alpha this server side lag CAN even kill super tanked shinies ) |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
43
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 21:46:00 -
[37] - Quote
To my knowledge Time Dilation has NEVER taken effect in any HQ site not even the contested MOM(Kundalini Manifest) sites which can field close to 160 player ships hundreds of wrecks and 20-50 NPCs |
baltec1
659
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 21:49:00 -
[38] - Quote
You could always abandon them as you go so you dont end up with a massive pandoras box. |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
385
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 21:49:00 -
[39] - Quote
Tarsus Zateki wrote:Wrecks and cans floating in space cause negligible latency hits. You'd have to leave hundreds of them lying around before there was any impact and it would be entirely client side. If your PC can handle an incursion it can handle rendering some wrecks. Remove wreck brackets and you'll be in even better shape.
This ranks up there with the continued idiocy that spamming chat channels in game causes lag.
think of death by a thousand papercuts.
that's what this issue seems like. For every little thing that occours in the grid, the server has to send that update to all the clients in that grid.
that means, like somebody said before, if you abandon a single wreck in a grid with 100 people, that update must be sent to those 100 people.
do this to 100 wrecks, and you need to do 100x100 updates, and since this is something that is totally related to DB updates, (and we all know that DB is one of the places in EVE that is quite... frail, lag-wise), you get hit by massive DB lag.
if I understood what the OP said, this is an evolution from the old "drop a gazzilion of BM's in a can" exploit. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Miss Kerr
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 21:57:00 -
[40] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Abandoning of wrecks&cans should show up in fleet histories so apropriate punishment can be dealt out by the fleet!
It does not show up in the fleet history, therefore making find the culprit impossible. |
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1262
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 22:31:00 -
[41] - Quote
Wrecks do not have to be blue to be salvaged. Looted without aggression, yes.
I have seen things lag out from abandoning a field of wrecks, not just in incursion sites either.
But when I do it, it's to be be nice.
|
Miss Kerr
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 00:10:00 -
[42] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Wrecks do not have to be blue to be salvaged.
Correct...
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Looted without aggression, yes.
No...looting will give you aggression.
I think I will try and pose this question in a petition. See if CCP responds that way...i'll keep everyone posted if I get a reply |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E. Comic Mischief
478
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 00:43:00 -
[43] - Quote
Although you do not need to blue wrecks to salvage them with a alt, you do need to blue then so the alt can tractor them.
Still, doing it during the fight, rather than after the fight looks to be non-kosher.
I do like the idea of fleets protecting themselves from this effect by abandoning the wrecks as they go.
In the long term if CCP could make the wrecks go blue at the rate of one per tick that would remove the lag issue. It would take two minutes for 120 wrecks to go blue, but so what? You cannot get to them that fast. I am running for the CSM https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=779668#post779668 |
Endeavour Starfleet
651
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 01:06:00 -
[44] - Quote
KrakizBad wrote:Endeavour Starfleet wrote:Bluing during combat is most often done with harm in mind. And has gotten people banned. Cite your source, this sounds like bull to me. Also thanks to OP for giving me another weapon I hadn't thought of for my incursion bait alt.
I would suggest you read the EULA again. |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1262
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 01:42:00 -
[45] - Quote
Miss Kerr wrote:Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Wrecks do not have to be blue to be salvaged. Correct... Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Looted without aggression, yes. No...looting will give you aggression. I think I will try and pose this question in a petition. See if CCP responds that way...i'll keep everyone posted if I get a reply
Typo - thanks.
Looks like a dilemma: on the one hand, there is a lot of paranoia about aggression in incursions and loot stealing can play a role in that problem, so it would be safe to blue the wrecks when someone outside of corp/fleet comes on - but that causes the lag that makes baby Jesus cry and logistics die.
Should be looked at as a bug then.
I blued up a field of wrecks once in a lvl 4 mission for lack of time to deal with them and hung up for 7 to 8 seconds once. |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1262
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 01:45:00 -
[46] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:Although you do not need to blue wrecks to salvage them with a alt, you do need to blue then so the alt can tractor them.
Still, doing it during the fight, rather than after the fight looks to be non-kosher.
I do like the idea of fleets protecting themselves from this effect by abandoning the wrecks as they go.
In the long term if CCP could make the wrecks go blue at the rate of one per tick that would remove the lag issue. It would take two minutes for 120 wrecks to go blue, but so what? You cannot get to them that fast.
An automatic "no claim" setting that makes all wrecks you pop un-owned the moment it's spawned (at the death of the target of course) would be a great feature.
I sense Punkturis will post in here so we see a DEV link but there will be no definitive answer and we will all be therefore teased once again and some of you will enjoy it.
|
KrakizBad
Eve Defence Force Fatal Ascension
363
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 04:04:00 -
[47] - Quote
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:KrakizBad wrote:Endeavour Starfleet wrote:Bluing during combat is most often done with harm in mind. And has gotten people banned. Cite your source, this sounds like bull to me. Also thanks to OP for giving me another weapon I hadn't thought of for my incursion bait alt. I would suggest you read the EULA again. Nope, didn't see anything about bluing wrecks in it. Link your source. http://blog.beyondreality.se/Incursion-hose Remove all incursions from hisec |
Linda Shadowborn
Dark Steel Industries
86
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 04:33:00 -
[48] - Quote
the very few times I ran the mom site before giving up on incursions we always abandoned as we went along so the lag hit would be minimal. |
|
GM Haggis
Game Masters C C P Alliance
53
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 05:15:00 -
[49] - Quote
At present there is no rule against abandoning containers, as you have pointed out deliberately generating lag is a EULA violation but there is no evidence that this is why the wrecks are being abandoned in these cases. I shall, however, bring this to the attention of the GM team tomorrow to see if this is something that needs further investigation.
It would be helpful if we could get some logserver logs from these abandonment events to help us track down and fix the issue permanently, you can check the EVElopedia article linked below for information about producing and submitting these files to us :
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Bug_reporting
GM Haggis ~ EVE Online Customer Support Team Tea & Coffee Maker Extraordinaire |
|
Endeavour Starfleet
652
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 06:39:00 -
[50] - Quote
It seriously needs further investigation. As you can see a poster in this thread has stated intentions to use it in a manner obviously against the EULA.
As for finding the events. Look at your internal logs for most used incursion systems look for the DCs and compare them with abandon events.
Yes many of them are accidents but you will notice quickly the ones meant for harm. Midsite bluing at convenient times for a logi DC or heavy damage without ability to broadcast. Look at your petitions for extra data and you will see how serious this is very quickly.
Be aware that hatred for incursion content by runners of other content and playstyles is rather extreme right now. Use of this and other exploits to cause chaos is going to happen by them. |
|
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
43
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 09:00:00 -
[51] - Quote
GM Haggis wrote:At present there is no rule against abandoning containers, as you have pointed out deliberately generating lag is a EULA violation but there is no evidence that this is why the wrecks are being abandoned in these cases. I shall, however, bring this to the attention of the GM team tomorrow to see if this is something that needs further investigation. It would be helpful if we could get some logserver logs from these abandonment events to help us track down and fix the issue permanently, you can check the EVElopedia article linked below for information about producing and submitting these files to us : http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Bug_reporting
PROBLEM IS THERE IS NO LOG OF WHOM ABANDONS THESE WRECKS!!! Or am I missing something & there is a way to determine in the fleet histories who is abandoning & creating this lag? thnx in advance :) |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2154
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 09:16:00 -
[52] - Quote
GM Haggis wrote:At present there is no rule against abandoning containers, as you have pointed out deliberately generating lag is a EULA violation but there is no evidence that this is why the wrecks are being abandoned in these cases. I shall, however, bring this to the attention of the GM team tomorrow to see if this is something that needs further investigation. It would be helpful if we could get some logserver logs from these abandonment events to help us track down and fix the issue permanently, you can check the EVElopedia article linked below for information about producing and submitting these files to us : http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Bug_reporting
the cheetah still lurks "WeGÇÖre a professional Merc Alliance, like PL" ~ snot shot, 2012 |
The Snowman
Aliastra Gallente Federation
29
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 09:27:00 -
[53] - Quote
I thought the wrecks didnt produce any salavage, so why would they be abandoned to salvage? |
|
CCP Veritas
C C P C C P Alliance
424
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 11:42:00 -
[54] - Quote
Incidentally, Gridlock's recent round of optimizations reworked the client's response to wrecks being abandoned. It's still not *lightning fast* but it should be way better than before.
Is it? CCP Veritas - Senior Programmer - EVE Software |
|
Asuri Kinnes
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
292
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 13:25:00 -
[55] - Quote
KrakizBad wrote:Nope, didn't see anything about bluing wrecks in it. Link your source.
GM Haggis wrote: as you have pointed out deliberately generating lag is a EULA violation Source Linked...
I would think that anyone who's spent a *little* time in Eve would know that deliberately causing lag was a violation - but you get a new one every day I guess.
Bye the way, I have an Exploration Tengu in Jita for sale on contracts... Just don't read the fine print to hard...
Wormholes: The *NEW* end game of Eve - Online: No Local. No Lag. No Blues (No Intell Channesl). No Blobs.
NEW FEATURE: NO INCARNA! |
Professor Alphane
Alphane Research Co-operative
294
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 15:14:00 -
[56] - Quote
GM Haggis wrote:At present there is no rule against abandoning containers, as you have pointed out deliberately generating lag is a EULA violation but there is no evidence that this is why the wrecks are being abandoned in these cases.
A couple of points if I may.
The actions of the abbandoning player is a choice right. A binary one.
Either Abbandon your ship to change to another
or Warp to a station to do it.
Note if you do the first in full knowledge and awarness that it will create lag, the you have indeed made a decision to delibaratly create lag..
You point would seem to be .. it can't be proven this was done with malicious intent, my asserstion is it doesn't matter as you have chosen to delibaratly create lag which may have a detremental effect , that is against the EULA wether your true intention was malicious or merely lazy, is of no consequence.
Further to this as this tactic could be used maliciosly it should be an offence forwith. In a situation where poeple could lose very expensive ships for the sake of someone saving a couple of seconds warp time the consequences must be weighed up ,and as the 'defendant' has the most to lose in this case and the offenders actions are otherwise fairly insignificant gameplay wise, I think it would be advisable to find in favour of the defence in this case.
YOU MUST THINK FIRST.... |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
537
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 15:51:00 -
[57] - Quote
Professor Alphane wrote: Abbandon your ship to change to another.
That is not the issue here. The issue is abandoning wrecks. You know, turning them "blue" to everyone, so anyone can tractor/loot them.
Apparently, then where are hundreds of wrecks on grid, and someone abandons all of them at once a few seconds of lag can occur -- time that is critical to those who depend on prompt remote reps to survive.
Rifterlings - Small gang lowsec combat corp specializing in frigates and cruisers. US Timezone veterans and newbies alike are welcome to join us. Come chat in the "we fly rifters" in-game channel. |
|
CCP TomB
C C P C C P Alliance
7
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 16:04:00 -
[58] - Quote
Petrus Blackshell wrote:Apparently, then where are hundreds of wrecks on grid, and someone abandons all of them at once a few seconds of lag can occur -- time that is critical to those who depend on prompt remote reps to survive.
There were optimizations done that should have reduced the performance hit in the last big patch. Is this as bad? |
|
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
537
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 16:07:00 -
[59] - Quote
CCP TomB wrote:Petrus Blackshell wrote:Apparently, then where are hundreds of wrecks on grid, and someone abandons all of them at once a few seconds of lag can occur -- time that is critical to those who depend on prompt remote reps to survive.
There were optimizations done that should have reduced the performance hit in the last big patch. Is this as bad? I don't do incursions, I hate being rich. According to what other people are saying though, it apparently does. This might warrant looking into in a hermetic environment like Sisi. Rifterlings - Small gang lowsec combat corp specializing in frigates and cruisers. US Timezone veterans and newbies alike are welcome to join us. Come chat in the "we fly rifters" in-game channel. |
Miss Kerr
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 16:37:00 -
[60] - Quote
CCP TomB wrote:Petrus Blackshell wrote:Apparently, then where are hundreds of wrecks on grid, and someone abandons all of them at once a few seconds of lag can occur -- time that is critical to those who depend on prompt remote reps to survive.
There were optimizations done that should have reduced the performance hit in the last big patch. Is this as bad?
I havent been able to play the last couple of days. I will be able to test later today and will post my findings along with the logserver report via bug report.
From what Ive heard though the optimization have made it better.
Now....what about adding the abandoning to the fleet log? |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |