EVE Search - Arbitrary Delay Timers

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Arbitrary Delay Timers

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Michwich	Posted - 2009.09.03 14:52:00 - [1] The game has progressed and unesseccary time sinks that slowed the game down to a point of unplayablitiy for some have been removed for the better. By speeding the game up the death life cycle has also sped up leading to a more vibrant and interesting game. Id even argue this(faster game) has done more to increase the bottom line then the previouse strategy of wasting people time in hopes they play and subscribe longer. Actually, I wouldnt call it wasting time, id call it stealing time,as sitting infront of a arbitrary delay timer is not wasting time its stealing time, having fun playing the game is wasting time and Im happy to do that. Infact now that I think of it it was probably these time saving features that turned me from trying the trial every year or so to actually subscribing. But theres a lot more that can be done to speed up the game, more specicifically the arbitrary delay timers like what you see when undocking or changing ship should be removed. I can understand a delay timer in the sense that its needed as a lag buffer when entering a system or whatever but I see no reason to wait 30 seconds to change ship while the game gives you some lame excuse about giving it time to "come to its senses" please, CCP come to your senses and remove these fake timers.
Washell Olivaw	Posted - 2009.09.03 14:57:00 - [2] Technical reason, 30 second session timers are there to make sure all your stuff is copied correctly from node A to node B within the server. If you don't mind having your stuff disappear, feel free to ask CCP to disable them for you personally. Originally by: Signature Everybody has a photographic memory, some people just don't have film.
Khemul Zula Amarr Keisen Trade League	Posted - 2009.09.03 15:00:00 - [3] Moar arbitrary timers needed. We just haven't had enough of these threads in the entirely wrong forum section.
Michwich	Posted - 2009.09.03 15:00:00 - [4] Originally by: Washell Olivaw Technical reason, 30 second session timers are there to make sure all your stuff is copied correctly from node A to node B within the server. If you don't mind having your stuff disappear, feel free to ask CCP to disable them for you personally. Id rather just donate one of my old pentium 2's to help with the copying speed. Then we can all benefit from the saved time not just me.
Lork Niffle Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.09.03 15:02:00 - [5] I have a 1.7GHz CPU can i help? Seriously though, just get used to it and check everything before you undock and change sessions and they will barely appear. ------------------------------------- Read my bio ingame for tips on how to live and not be called nasty names by me.
Michwich	Posted - 2009.09.03 15:03:00 - [6] Originally by: Khemul Zula Moar arbitrary timers needed. We just haven't had enough of these threads in the entirely wrong forum section. Do you mind staying on topic? Im sure theres a "thread complaints" section you could have posted this in.
Sky Grunthor Minmatar Conflagration.	Posted - 2009.09.03 15:08:00 - [7] You called it an arbitrary time sink. Someone informed you that it was not an arbitrary time sink and actually served a technical purpose. /thread. So what are you talking about now? ------------------------------------------------- Search: Sky Grunthor
Jose Quevo Gallente Center for Advanced Studies	Posted - 2009.09.03 15:09:00 - [8] Are you seriously bothered by a 30-second delay counter? What about hours upon hours of gate-camping without results? What would you call that? ----
Ban Doga	Posted - 2009.09.03 15:15:00 - [9] Originally by: Washell Olivaw Technical reason, 30 second session timers are there to make sure all your stuff is copied correctly from node A to node B within the server. If you don't mind having your stuff disappear, feel free to ask CCP to disable them for you personally. I hope that's not the case. It's pretty lame to wait a fixed, arbitrary amount of time for a process to do something "correctly". I mean will the process copy stuff incorrectly with less time? And is there no way to tell when it finished correctly and continue then, instead of waiting x seconds and hoping (because that's exactly what it would be) that everything went fine? Please don't tell me it works that way...
Ban Doga	Posted - 2009.09.03 15:16:00 - [10] Originally by: Jose Quevo Are you seriously bothered by a 30-second delay counter? What about hours upon hours of gate-camping without results? What would you call that? IMO there is a huge difference between someone making you wait and you deciding to spent time.
Ukucia Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.09.03 15:18:00 - [11] Originally by: Michwich more specicifically the arbitrary delay timers like what you see when undocking or changing ship should be removed. Being able to instantly change ships or instantly re-dock has bad* implications in the PvP side of things. It's not just for convenience, and it's not really for any technical reason. *Or good implications, depending on whether it's helping or hurting you.
Khemul Zula Amarr Keisen Trade League	Posted - 2009.09.03 15:20:00 - [12] Originally by: Ban Doga Originally by: Jose Quevo Are you seriously bothered by a 30-second delay counter? What about hours upon hours of gate-camping without results? What would you call that? IMO there is a huge difference between someone making you wait and you deciding to spent time. Yes, hours is a huge difference from 30 seconds. But either way this thread is pointless. The timers are there for a reason (basically, not arbitrary) and so are not getting changed. Also, being in General Discussion doesn't help make this thread anything more then a whine troll.
Washell Olivaw	Posted - 2009.09.03 15:23:00 - [13] Assume 20,000 EVE players making 10 session changes a day. That makes 200,000 session changes. Assume with that with a 30 second timer 0.01% of them goes wrong. Than CCP gets 20 reimbursements petitions a day caused by this. Now assume that with a 10 second timer, 0.1% goes wrong. Then CCP gets 200 petitions a day. Say each petition takes 10 minutes to resolve than lowering the timer by 20 seconds will mean CCP will have to hire 3.75 GM to deal with the additional workload. (200-20 * 10= 1800/60 is 30 hours divided by 8 hour workday 3.75 workday). In 99.9% of the cases a 10 second counter would suffice. But 99.9% isn't good enough. For that matter, 99.99% means 20 people lose stuff on a daily basis. That's not good enough either. Because in the real world, it's more likely we make 2 million session changes a day. The 30 second timer puts the error margin somewhere at 99.99999% and CCP will keep it there. Lowering it is too expensive and prone to bad publicity. Originally by: Signature Everybody has a photographic memory, some people just don't have film.
Professor Tarantula Hedion University	Posted - 2009.09.03 15:39:00 - [14] For the love of god just let us switch between our salvager and main ship easily.
Ameelia Brightstarr Degenerate Corp Elite Trade Group	Posted - 2009.09.03 15:55:00 - [15] Edited by: Ameelia Brightstarr on 03/09/2009 15:58:07 Originally by: Washell Olivaw Technical reason, 30 second session timers are there to make sure all your stuff is copied correctly from node A to node B within the server. If you don't mind having your stuff disappear, feel free to ask CCP to disable them for you personally. Wow they must be working on some really ancient RDBMS, or tragically bad code/DB optimization, a moderate Oracle installation such as run on a quad core wintel box can manage 10,000 transactions per second, the highest recorded TPS being 60,000 or 4 million transactions per minute. I myself have written an API of a UK electricity supplier that processed 200 million customer records per hour back in 1996 on hardware that sc****d in at ú110,000. So taking 30 seconds to commit the typical inventory of a ship sounds inordinately slow. As regarding safety of transactions, all commercial databases have inbuilt data protection/integrity measures that make it almost impossible for data to be 'lost' even in multi node systems. The session changer smells of zerg prevention to me, similar to resurrection timers in WoW.
Washell Olivaw	Posted - 2009.09.03 16:10:00 - [16] Edited by: Washell Olivaw on 03/09/2009 16:11:34 Originally by: Ameelia Brightstarr Irrelevant Because I already corrected myself in a later post, plus, I said node to node, not node to DB. And mister Brainiac, there's a difference between setting a 30sec timer so you know that in 99.9999% of cases all data stuff is handled and actually taking 30 seconds on each transaction. And as other posters mentioned, it has gameplay/balance benefits too. Originally by: Signature Everybody has a photographic memory, some people just don't have film.
Ameelia Brightstarr Degenerate Corp Elite Trade Group	Posted - 2009.09.03 16:25:00 - [17] Originally by: Washell Olivaw Edited by: Washell Olivaw on 03/09/2009 16:11:34 Originally by: Ameelia Brightstarr Irrelevant Because I already corrected myself in a later post, plus, I said node to node, not node to DB. And mister Brainiac, there's a difference between setting a 30sec timer so you know that in 99.9999% of cases all data stuff is handled and actually taking 30 seconds on each transaction. And as other posters mentioned, it has gameplay/balance benefits too. Well since the whole kit and caboodle is on the same floor of canary wharf, I doubt it would take more than 2 MS for the InfiniBand fibre channels to transfer their load, especially at 96gb per second from one blade to the next.
Lork Niffle Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.09.03 16:34:00 - [18] Remember Amellia these results are usually from machines designed to simply beat the records and if they were put in real life situations the variations in the commands they are given mean they will fall over. Also for data transfer, those are peak rates with no extra information, many data rates are many factors times lower that advertised since they take into account error checking and processing. Example USB 2.0 should get a 480Mbits/60Mbs rate but many systems will only ever experience a top of 20 or so due to error checking and the system processing the data. ------------------------------------- Read my bio ingame for tips on how to live and not be called nasty names by me.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.09.03 16:41:00 - [19] Originally by: Ban Doga Originally by: Washell Olivaw Technical reason, 30 second session timers are there to make sure all your stuff is copied correctly from node A to node B within the server. If you don't mind having your stuff disappear, feel free to ask CCP to disable them for you personally. I hope that's not the case. It's pretty lame to wait a fixed, arbitrary amount of time for a process to do something "correctly". I mean will the process copy stuff incorrectly with less time? And is there no way to tell when it finished correctly and continue then, instead of waiting x seconds and hoping (because that's exactly what it would be) that everything went fine? Please don't tell me it works that way... Every time you boar a ship the server us calculating the effect of you skill upon the ship modules and drones, the correct level of the armor, shield and capacitor after your skills and the modules that affect them are onlined by your skills, an so on. Sometime it misses a beat and you leave the station with half shield or offlined module. Probably if the node has no heavy requests or you are boarding a shuttle the time is overaboundant, but when there are heavy requests or you use a ship with plenty of module slots and you have lots of skills the server need every second. 30 second probably was chosen because it is sufficient to do the needed operations, communicate them to your PC and get confirmation back in most heavy lag situations. Having different times depending on the real time needed could favor some player, for example a guy boarding a freighter (no module slots) than a BS and maybe create problems with people boarding ships in rapid sequence and creating lag or server load.
Babel Boom and Bust Economics Ltd. N0thing To See Here	Posted - 2009.09.03 16:43:00 - [20] You could spend the infuriating 30 seconds by doing a few short breathing exercises and relax. I have a feeling you kinda need it ... . "Out of the good of evil born, Came Uriel's voice of cherub scorn"
Ukucia Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.09.03 16:53:00 - [21] Originally by: Ameelia Brightstarr Originally by: Washell Olivaw Edited by: Washell Olivaw on 03/09/2009 16:11:34 Originally by: Ameelia Brightstarr Irrelevant Because I already corrected myself in a later post, plus, I said node to node, not node to DB. And mister Brainiac, there's a difference between setting a 30sec timer so you know that in 99.9999% of cases all data stuff is handled and actually taking 30 seconds on each transaction. And as other posters mentioned, it has gameplay/balance benefits too. Well since the whole kit and caboodle is on the same floor of canary wharf, I doubt it would take more than 2 MS for the InfiniBand fibre channels to transfer their load, especially at 96gb per second from one blade to the next. Because the only thing going over the wire is 1 session change.
Zeba Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company	Posted - 2009.09.03 17:22:00 - [22] Edited by: Zeba on 03/09/2009 17:25:12 ITT: People trying to compare a common enterprise level database servers performance limits and tasks to a single world game servers performance limits and tasks. The two are nothing alike past the fact that they have to transfer and digest huge amounts of realtime data. When was the last time your oracle server had to compute all the crap nessasary for a large fleet fight with its second by second change of enviroment and still have enough power left over for the mundane things like the market and hangers or god knows what else in this game that needs database time. Quote: [03:39:05] Emperor Salazar > HOLY **** ITS ZEBA [03:39:20] Emperor Salazar > NEVER STOP POASTING Zeba is the BEST! ~Mitnal
De'Veldrin Minmatar Special Projects Executive	Posted - 2009.09.03 17:23:00 - [23] Originally by: Professor Tarantula For the love of god just let us switch between our salvager and main ship easily. 1. Dock 2. Open Fitting Screen 3. Load saved fitting 4. Undock The whole operation takes less than 30 seconds, unless you click slowly. No need to change ships. Although, to be honest, waiting the 30 seconds and right click Make Active is a lot less clicking. --Vel Jesus loves you. Everyone else thinks you're an asshat.
Professor Tarantula Hedion University	Posted - 2009.09.03 17:44:00 - [24] Originally by: De'Veldrin Originally by: Professor Tarantula For the love of god just let us switch between our salvager and main ship easily. 1. Dock 2. Open Fitting Screen 3. Load saved fitting 4. Undock The whole operation takes less than 30 seconds, unless you click slowly. No need to change ships. Although, to be honest, waiting the 30 seconds and right click Make Active is a lot less clicking. As it is right now, i start browsing websites or go to get something like a glass of water rather than stare at the screen for 30 seconds. Sometimes i get caught up in something else and return to what i was doing in EVE much later. 30 seconds on its own is nothing, but when you wait that long often it really adds up.
Devine13 Nomad LLP	Posted - 2009.09.03 18:53:00 - [25] Originally by: De'Veldrin Although, to be honest, waiting the 30 seconds and right click Make Active is a lot less clicking. And click-dragging your ship out of the ships hangar is even less clicks! Well only 1 less click, but I personally find it much easier.
Dianna Soreil Eve University Ivy League	Posted - 2009.09.03 19:04:00 - [26] Edited by: Dianna Soreil on 03/09/2009 19:04:47 delete please
Rawr Cristina Caldari Annihilate. Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.09.03 19:46:00 - [27] It's kind of annoying when you need to swap ships in a hurry, and have to wait 30s after docking to switch ships, then another 30s after switching ships before you can undock again, which is often far too long if you're in a hurry - Malyutka (The Virus) -
Robdon	Posted - 2009.09.03 19:58:00 - [28] Yes, the session wait timer is about the single most annoying thing in the game, as far as I am concerned. Jumping systems, joining fleets, moving within fleets, swapping ships. Coding things based on times and timers is also extremely bad coding practice. 'States' should be used to determine when something has finished, not waiting for a number of seconds. What happens if it takes 31 seconds? They really should look at the timers, and try to get rid of them. I think they just put timers in rather than code it correctly, or inexperienced coders are doing it, as moving position in a fleet can simply not need a 30 second timer :(
VoiceInTheDesert Inroads	Posted - 2009.09.03 21:05:00 - [29] The OP is either a lame pvper who doesn't like that he can't dock his frig and undock in his ****mega immediately or a carebear that doesn't understand the danger of pvpers being able to do this. Oh yeah, and the technical reasons too (which are more important tbh)
Cheesestick Charlie	Posted - 2009.09.03 21:29:00 - [30] Originally by: Zeba Edited by: Zeba on 03/09/2009 17:25:12 ITT: People trying to compare a common enterprise level database servers performance limits and tasks to a single world game servers performance limits and tasks. The two are nothing alike past the fact that they have to transfer and digest huge amounts of realtime data. When was the last time your oracle server had to compute all the crap nessasary for a large fleet fight with its second by second change of enviroment and still have enough power left over for the mundane things like the market and hangers or god knows what else in this game that needs database time. Also ITT: People discussing the way the server works, because they obviously know EXACTLY how it works, why it fails and EXACTLY how it should be fixed. Without ever looking at the code, or any sort of dev saying that this is, indeed, how it works.

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.