EVE Search - Jump Limbo

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Jump Limbo

» 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)
Jerid Verges Gallente The Society of Innovation The Last Stand	Posted - 2010.04.25 03:07:00 - [1] Just an idea to throw out here. First of all, its got to clear two phases (Is it posssible? If so, is it a viable idea?) Currently lag and system loading are a problem, this is going to become doubly so after the Deep Safe nerf prevents loading the system from a safe point. The proposal is to have ships, when they are jumping through a system (And possibly cyno bridging) to be first removed from the system they are in (as it currently is) but instead of appearing in the next system and waiting for the client to load (Aka sitting duck) to have the ship removed to another place, a holding point that one is not able to travel to, so that the client can load the server before it appears in the next system (Would not even appear in local until it is finished loading). So basically, in a system where there is heavy traffic, a ship would jump, be deposited in another limbo system, then when it has finished loading the system it is going to is transported to that system.
Twilight Runner	Posted - 2010.04.26 02:15:00 - [2] Edited by: Twilight Runner on 26/04/2010 02:16:37 That would be too easy, this is ccp after all :) perhaps there should be a fleet jump, and noone decloaks until all have loaded in the fleet.
Misanthra	Posted - 2010.04.26 02:51:00 - [3] Way you drop in does needs some fixing. Coding to have grid pulled for sure before spawn would be nice. I'd just wish they'd fix coding for corpse generation at the bare minimum. Kind of sucks when you see your corpse floating next to you...at least give me the false hope spamming warp does something lol. See your corpse and its like...damn, guess I am stuck here till server catches up :( .
Torothanax	Posted - 2010.04.26 06:26:00 - [4] I LOVE massive fleet lag. But don't we all? One of the reasons I ditched null. Being a mindless drone of some super power was another, but off topic. If the idea worked, great! I can't see anyone having issues with a better grid loading experiance.
Jerid Verges Gallente The Society of Innovation The Last Stand	Posted - 2010.04.26 19:05:00 - [5] Originally by: Twilight Runner Edited by: Twilight Runner on 26/04/2010 02:16:37 That would be too easy, this is ccp after all :) I'm thinking the only reason CCP doesn't want to do it is because it would NOT be easy...or...they just don't really think about alternatives too much. I imagine it would take a lot of code writing to script players into a Jump Limbo and then the system they are heading.
Misanthra	Posted - 2010.04.26 22:55:00 - [6] CCP won't do it cause it likes certain sides in the big war going and wants them to have turkety shoots on the gates lol. Depends who lost the battle and which chestbeaters/whiners post in caod who ccp likes
cBOLTSON Caldari Shadow Legion. Talos Coalition	Posted - 2010.04.26 23:43:00 - [7] Originally by: Torothanax I LOVE massive fleet lag. But don't we all? One of the reasons I ditched null. Being a mindless drone of some super power was another, but off topic. If the idea worked, great! I can't see anyone having issues with a better grid loading experiance. LOL Also, if you were being a midless drone then you have only yourself to blame.
Torothanax	Posted - 2010.04.27 03:59:00 - [8] Off topic much? If you like null, have at it. Wanna be a "dig-it" for some super power? All you. I may get bored of quick, cheap, easy pvp at some point and give it another shot, but for now I don't want anything to do with null other then the occasional romp through it. It amuses me that find your play style superior to everyone else's in a sandbox game. Arrogant much?
Whitehound The Whitehound Corporation	Posted - 2010.04.28 08:40:00 - [9] How is the limbo system going to be better than the target system? The game lags because it has to move ships around. An additional move into a limbo system will double the lag. --
Jerid Verges Gallente The Society of Innovation The Last Stand	Posted - 2010.04.28 17:22:00 - [10] Originally by: Whitehound How is the limbo system going to be better than the target system? It's not suppose to be. It's just simply a placeholder. Quote: The game lags because it has to move ships around. An additional move into a limbo system will double the lag. For who? Even if the lag is doubled it would have no effect, the client would load the limbo system, which albiet would not take much considering it would be empty. Then load the target system, once it is done be transfered.

Whitehound The Whitehound Corporation	Posted - 2010.04.28 22:06:00 - [11] Edited by: Whitehound on 28/04/2010 22:07:53 Originally by: Jerid Verges For who? Even if the lag is doubled it would have no effect, the client would load the limbo system, which albiet would not take much considering it would be empty. Then load the target system, once it is done be transfered. For whom? For all. For those in the source and for those in the destination system. Think about this: what happens if a client disconnects while its ship is being moved? And what happens to the rest of the fleet, what to do with to the disconnected client? Think it through and you will see that it creates more overhead than it currently needs. It is best to move each ship on its own from one system to another. Any logic to gather a group of ships will need to add more delay than necessary, causes either the fleet to lag or causes lags for other players in these systems, and it just would not be fair for all any more. Therefore is a ship moved when the player presses the button. The problem is not the clients nor the servers but the Internet. Therefore is any additional move you make a potential source for another lag. --
Jerid Verges Gallente The Society of Innovation The Last Stand	Posted - 2010.04.28 23:18:00 - [12] Originally by: Whitehound Edited by: Whitehound on 28/04/2010 22:07:53 Originally by: Jerid Verges For who? Even if the lag is doubled it would have no effect, the client would load the limbo system, which albiet would not take much considering it would be empty. Then load the target system, once it is done be transfered. For whom? For all. For those in the source and for those in the destination system. Wrong. When a person goes from system A to B system C is not affected, likewise from C to B system A is not affected. So when transitioning, there is no extra load on anyone in the system except the effect already being experienced currently, since there is no difference between jumping from system A into system B, or jumping from system C (the limbo system) to system B. The only difference anywhere is the client going from system A to B will now go from A to C to B. In otherwords, if I am in system A going to system B, under the current system I would go directly to B. On a modified network. I would go to C first, which would be empty so nothing to load there. I would then I would load system B. Then I would go to B. It's no different on B if I come from A or C. It doesn't change any mechanics. Except that the player remains in C whilst B is being loaded before being set into B. Of course, this is not even the real proposal. It is just a proposed mechanic to create the solution of the proposal (Which is that players jumping from system A to B are not in system B with nobody at the controls) CCP might come up with something better. I think it is a good idea even if it does require more resources. Quote: Think about this: what happens if a client disconnects while its ship is being moved? And what happens to the rest of the fleet, what to do with to the disconnected client? The client could do two things. Either 1) Go back to system A and perform an emergency warp. or 2) Go to system B and perform an emergency warp. It would really be no different then if you disconnected during a jump right now.
Whitehound The Whitehound Corporation	Posted - 2010.04.28 23:43:00 - [13] Originally by: Jerid Verges Wrong. No. The time it takes to move something from A to B takes less than to move it from A to AB, then to B. One move is less than two moves. You imagine that by going to an intermediate system that you would gain something, but you do not. If you still think that you are right then explain how you save time by adding a second move. Where does the time saving come from? There is no time saving. --
Jerid Verges Gallente The Society of Innovation The Last Stand	Posted - 2010.04.28 23:55:00 - [14] Originally by: Whitehound Originally by: Jerid Verges Wrong. No. The time it takes to move something from A to B takes less than to move it from A to AB, then to B. One move is less than two moves. You imagine that by going to an intermediate system that you would gain something, but you do not. If you still think that you are right then explain how you save time by adding a second move. Where does the time saving come from? There is no time saving. What are you talking about? This proposal has nothing to do with "Time Saving" this proposal has everything to do with reducing clientside lag when entering B system from A system. Or in the case of the proposal, from C system. A revised system of "Two moves" taking "More time" with "Less lag" is a much, much more preferred system then a current system of "One move" "Quicker travel" "Frozen client sitting duck at gate"
Whitehound The Whitehound Corporation	Posted - 2010.04.29 00:25:00 - [15] Edited by: Whitehound on 29/04/2010 00:27:17 Originally by: Jerid Verges What are you talking about? You do not understand where the lag is coming from but want to see it fixed on the server. The lag is neither coming from the client nor is it coming from the server. It is the latency between client and server. There is no fix for it. --
Jerid Verges Gallente The Society of Innovation The Last Stand	Posted - 2010.04.29 00:33:00 - [16] Edited by: Jerid Verges on 29/04/2010 00:34:42 Originally by: Whitehound Edited by: Whitehound on 29/04/2010 00:27:17 Originally by: Jerid Verges What are you talking about? You do not understand where the lag is coming from but want to see it fixed on the server. The lag is neither coming from the client nor is it coming from the server. It is the latency between client and server. There is no fix for it. And you do not understand what the proposal is. The point is to make the ship invulnerable to being destroyed whilst the client loads the server. There is less lag for people in system because they have the benefit of having it preloaded. Whilst people jumping into a system have a great deal more to load. This causes the client to freeze or lag even though the ship appears perfectly fine from server side and is perfectly fine from perspective of the other players.. And a perfectly fine ship sitting perfectly still because the player can't control it is a perfectly great target.
Whitehound The Whitehound Corporation	Posted - 2010.04.29 01:15:00 - [17] Originally by: Jerid Verges And you do not understand what the proposal is. The point is to make the ship invulnerable to being destroyed whilst the client loads the server. There is less lag for people in system because they have the benefit of having it preloaded. Whilst people jumping into a system have a great deal more to load. This causes the client to freeze or lag even though the ship appears perfectly fine from server side and is perfectly fine from perspective of the other players.. And a perfectly fine ship sitting perfectly still because the player can't control it is a perfectly great target. I do understand your proposal, but there is no such thing as a perfectly working system. You can imagine it as much as you like but each client responds in its own time and there is nothing the server can do to change this. You can make an entire fleet wait for 5 minutes and you will still see ships arriving at different times. --
Jerid Verges Gallente The Society of Innovation The Last Stand	Posted - 2010.04.29 01:57:00 - [18] Originally by: Whitehound Originally by: Jerid Verges And you do not understand what the proposal is. The point is to make the ship invulnerable to being destroyed whilst the client loads the server. There is less lag for people in system because they have the benefit of having it preloaded. Whilst people jumping into a system have a great deal more to load. This causes the client to freeze or lag even though the ship appears perfectly fine from server side and is perfectly fine from perspective of the other players.. And a perfectly fine ship sitting perfectly still because the player can't control it is a perfectly great target. I do understand your proposal, but there is no such thing as a perfectly working system. You can imagine it as much as you like but each client responds in its own time and there is nothing the server can do to change this. You can make an entire fleet wait for 5 minutes and you will still see ships arriving at different times. And what's worse about ships of a fleet arriving at different times? Better then an entire fleet arriving with nobody at the controls. At least this way players stand a chance. First you said this proposal would just lag the client more. Then you said the proposal would lag the system server more. Then you said this proposal was all about making server loading faster. So it appears to me you don't understand.
Whitehound The Whitehound Corporation	Posted - 2010.04.29 02:00:00 - [19] Originally by: Jerid Verges And what's worse about ships of a fleet arriving at different times? Better then an entire fleet arriving with nobody at the controls. At least this way players stand a chance. First you said this proposal would just lag the client more. Then you said the proposal would lag the system server more. Then you said this proposal was all about making server loading faster. So it appears to me you don't understand. That is not what I said. Read again, please. --
Jerid Verges Gallente The Society of Innovation The Last Stand	Posted - 2010.04.29 02:16:00 - [20] Yes you did. Quote: The game lags There is you saying the player will lag. Quote: causes lags for other players in these systems There is you saying the server will lag. (Since only performance issues serverside will affect multiple players when other people join in) Quote: Where does the time saving come from? There is you assuming this proposal has something to do with saving load time. Not to mention. You keep avoiding my rebuffs when I point out you're wrong (About the game, about the server, about the 'time') What the heck are you trying to drive at?

Whitehound The Whitehound Corporation	Posted - 2010.04.29 03:17:00 - [21] Edited by: Whitehound on 29/04/2010 03:23:24 Originally by: Jerid Verges What the heck are you trying to drive at? That your proposal will not work. By moving an entire fleet into a temporary system do you increase the number of problems rather than to reduce them. Let's assume you are right and one can move an entire fleet perfectly from one system to another. Then the slowest client will define when the entire fleetarrives, or, the slow clients will have to get kicked out of the fleet in order for a majority to arrive in time. This means that you have two problems to deal with when the size of a fleet increases. Either the fleet jump takes longer and longer as the probability for a slow client increases with the number of clients, or, the size of a fleet reaches a limit because more and more clients need to get kicked out to guarantee a time limit. There is a simple solution to this problem: one handles each client separately (players jump when they want to) instead of trying to jump an entire fleet. This is one example of how your proposal will introduce problems. It does not say how to make all ships appear at the same time in one system nor how to make it appear for every player at the same time. --
Jerid Verges Gallente The Society of Innovation The Last Stand	Posted - 2010.04.29 03:32:00 - [22] Originally by: Whitehound the slow clients will have to get kicked out of the fleet in order for a majority to arrive in time. We both know that that would never be implimented. Don't talk nonsense. Quote: This means that you have two problems to deal with when the size of a fleet increases. Either the fleet jump takes longer and longer as the probability for a slow client increases with the number of clients Go post a thread in General Discussion right now and take a poll. Or better yet, go to COAD since they are all people who live in Nullsec. You ask them if they would prefer having to endure a longer server loading time during jumps/bridges but get immunity during that loading time. What do you think they would prefer. Quote: There is a simple solution to this problem: one handles each client separately instead of trying to jump an entire fleet. Well technically, under the current mechanics the system already handles each ship jumping on an individual basis (Although, when each player can start interfacing with their client lag free would be different for each) Except. I'm not even sure what you're saying here. Quote: This is one example of how your proposal will introduce problems. It does not say how to make all ships appear at the same time in one system nor how to make it appear for every player at the same time. Because I never said that this proposal was about synchronizing the jump of a fleet between system A and B? There you go again. Creating another fictatious problem that my proposal would present (When it doesn't) I can probably imagine that unless there were a program that determined if all the ships in the fleet were preloaded before sending them to system B that they would just enter the system once they finish loading regardless of the fleet. (Though, unless there are signifigant differences in machine performance or internet connection, a synchronized jump should have everyone through a system on a somewhat similar timeframe)
Whitehound The Whitehound Corporation	Posted - 2010.04.29 04:02:00 - [23] Originally by: Jerid Verges (Though, unless there are signifigant differences in machine performance or internet connection, a synchronized jump should have everyone through a system on a somewhat similar timeframe) And there is the problem of the fairness for others. A fleet jump will require to perform many database transactions at once. This will likely cause a short freeze / pause for everyone, even when they are not part of the fleet and just happen to be in one of the systems, making fleet jumps an annoying game experience. --
Jerid Verges Gallente The Society of Innovation The Last Stand	Posted - 2010.04.29 04:16:00 - [24] Originally by: Whitehound Originally by: Jerid Verges (Though, unless there are signifigant differences in machine performance or internet connection, a synchronized jump should have everyone through a system on a somewhat similar timeframe) And there is the problem of the fairness for others. A fleet jump will require to perform many database transactions at once. This will likely cause a short freeze / pause for everyone, even when they are not part of the fleet and just happen to be in one of the systems, making fleet jumps an annoying game experience. Which, of course. You are again wrong about. What happens between database transactions between system A and system C will not affect system B. Never. It doesn't happen in the current game AT ALL. Whatever system B experiences will be the same no matter how an enemy fleet jumps in. Except that, the invading force will now have the grid preloaded before they are in B system. If anything, this has the ability to IMPROVE server performance in B system by having the force that is jumping into the system preload the grid, that LESSENS the strain on resources of the server at that particular moment.
Whitehound The Whitehound Corporation	Posted - 2010.04.29 09:21:00 - [25] Edited by: Whitehound on 29/04/2010 10:33:17 Originally by: Jerid Verges Which, of course. You are again wrong about. What happens between database transactions between system A and system C will not affect system B. Never. It doesn't happen in the current game AT ALL. Just keep wishing that I am wrong . I want you to understand the problems that your proposal will create. If you continue to take my comments as flames then no one will care about your proposal anyway. You cannot take criticism! On the topic, the problem with the fairness is that the server processes each request on a first come, first serve-basis and for each player/client, without giving anyone precedence. By creating a fleet jump operation will you indirectly give a fleet of players precedence over a single, non-fleeted player. In systems where you have a lot of fleets travelling through will the game experience for the single player begin to suck, because a fleet of players is processed as if it was a request made by a single player. Originally by: Jerid Verges If anything, this has the ability to IMPROVE server performance in B system by having the force that is jumping into the system preload the grid, that LESSENS the strain on resources of the server at that particular moment. Rolling Eyes It has the ability to improve the performance? I wish you had the balls to write that it DOES improve the performance. ... Fact is that you do not know. Unless CCP are noobs will their code already work very efficiently and all you do is to add something extra, and thereby reduce the performance. It will not improve the performance. I am starting to think that your computer is just very slow and that your Internet connection sucks. Perhaps a faulty wireless connection. And now you want everyone else to wait for your ship to arrive and at the same time as others, by making everyone else wait for you. Admit it! --
Jerid Verges Gallente The Society of Innovation The Last Stand	Posted - 2010.04.29 16:14:00 - [26] Originally by: Whitehound You cannot take criticism! You are not making very good criticism. You keep switching your arguements around because I keep defeating them. Quote: because a fleet of players is processed as if it was a request made by a single player. Where does it say ANYWHERE that Eve servers process fleet ops as request made by a single player? Quote: It has the ability to improve the performance? I wish you had the balls to write that it DOES improve the performance. ... Fact is that you do not know. Unless CCP are noobs will their code already work very efficiently and all you do is to add something extra, and thereby reduce the performance. It will not improve the performance. I do not think you understand server load very well. If players have the grid preloaded before they are on it then that means the strain on the server when they are actually jumped through is LESS because less of the server's resources are devoted to grid loading for these clients (Since they are already loaded). By spreading out the stress on the server when a single massive fleet jumps through instead of suddenly piling on a ***load of stress when the fleet clicks the "Jump" button you can reduce the lag everybody is recieving. At least, in theory that is. Your theory of "Adding more programming makes the server slower" is a lot of hot air. Quote: their code already work very efficiently and all you do is to add something extra Well they do seem to be noobs since lag was not so bad a problem before Dominion (Oops?) Quote: I am starting to think that your computer is just very slow and that your Internet connection sucks. Haha! My connection is actually better then most! You know how I can tell? Because my ping on FPS servers is less then 100. It can go from 60-100 depending on the performance of my machine, the server, and my connection. The point is is that it is on average lower then other players. You see, other players with poor ping affect MY performance on the server by causing an additionally strong load on the server due to their poor connection. If the load is too much the server begins to lag everybody regardless of connectivity. Quote:** And now you want everyone else to wait for your ship to arrive and at the same time as others, by making everyone else wait for you. Admit it! You are frankly starting to grasp at straws. I have never encountered lag at all in Eve. I have on occasion been disconnected. Your little theory that "I want everybody to wait for me" is frankly...childish. It is no secret that when people jump on grid into laging systems like Jita that their client can be frozen until the grid loads. Everybody "Arrives" at the same time regardless. Different people get their client's unstuck at different times (Hint, the people camping the gate have their clients unstuck faster).
Whitehound The Whitehound Corporation	Posted - 2010.04.29 17:31:00 - [27] Originally by: Jerid Verges Your little theory that "I want everybody to wait for me" is frankly...childish. It is accurate and you got caught. --
Jerid Verges Gallente The Society of Innovation The Last Stand	Posted - 2010.04.29 22:34:00 - [28] Originally by: Whitehound Edited by: Whitehound on 29/04/2010 17:44:57 Originally by: Jerid Verges Where does it say ANYWHERE that Eve servers process fleet ops as request made by a single player? How does your fleet jump work then? Is it not initiated by the commander? I don't know WHERE you found "Fleet Jump" but I assure you it does not exist. To be fair, I cannot speak of Cyno Bridging. But I have FCed before and there is no "Jump Fleet through X Stargate" option. Every individual member of a fleet must MUST press "Jump" on their own accord. Quote: Quote: ... is LESS because less of the server's resources are devoted to grid loading for these clients (Since they are already loaded). And it will suck for others who are not members of the fleet. That was my point. Quote: By spreading out the stress on the server when a single massive fleet jumps through instead of suddenly piling on a ***load of stress when the fleet clicks the "Jump" button you can reduce the lag everybody is recieving. And that is how it is now when everyone jumps all by themselves. Now you are just backpeddling away from "Fleets" and going to "Individual Members" when in fact there is no difference. Even if an individual jumps through a stargate or a large amount of individuals do, the server still has to load the client with all the stuff in the next system. This creates a huge lag spike for the client trying to load the server, (Which also ripples and effects ships on the server as more server resources are diverted to accomodate the new ships). Preloading the grid allows this "spike" to be softened. Originally by:** Jerid Verges Your little theory that "I want everybody to wait for me" is frankly...childish. It is accurate and you got caught. It is not accurate at all, as I have said, I do not get lag on Eve. And lol. You are still not even trying to address the REAL proposal here. Which is basically "Invulnerability while loading grid" Jump limbo is just one means to an end.
Captain Futur3	Posted - 2010.04.30 00:49:00 - [29] Just to make it clear that i got the point of this discussion: OP wants to fix the problem, that when you jump a fleet(or group) in a new system, that when the group is big enough, the group lags that much, that they cant do anything while the enemy who is already in the system is able to attack them and kill them before they can give orders. Is that right? If yes, i do think that the A->C->B solution would work, but only if the jump from system C to system B is not a common jump. More some kind of "loading screen" where the group members are loading the system informations. The server is then transferring the group datas into the system and then when everyone has loaded the stuff, the ships will jump into the system. But lag in general will not be fixed, nor will it run any faster. (at least thats what i got when i read this thread) But i dont have any fleet fight lag experience, so this is just theory.
Jerid Verges Gallente The Society of Innovation The Last Stand	Posted - 2010.04.30 02:25:00 - [30] Originally by: Captain Futur3 OP wants to fix the problem, that when you jump a fleet(or group) in a new system, that when the group is big enough, the group lags that much, that they cant do anything while the enemy who is already in the system is able to attack them and kill them before they can give orders. Is that right? That is the problem yes. Quote: If yes, i do think that the A->C->B solution would work, but only if the jump from system C to system B is not a common jump. More some kind of "loading screen" where the group members are loading the system informations. The server is then transferring the group datas into the system and then when everyone has loaded the stuff, the ships will jump into the system. This is exactly the proposal yes. (Well sort of, this is just the means to the end, which is to stop the problem) Quote: But lag in general will not be fixed, nor will it run any faster. Of course, this is not a "Fix lag" suggestion. The only thing I am not 100% sure of is that reducing server load upon arrival (By having clients preload the system/grid) will result in an overall performance increase for everyone. It theoretically should happen considering when clients put load onto the server.



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.