EVE Search - New Dev Blog: 64 bits should be enough for everybody

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

New Dev Blog: 64 bits should be enough for everybody

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 3 post(s)
Solbright Advanced Security And Asset Protection	Posted - 2010.10.23 02:37:00 - [1] We finally have the real reason for the mass deletion of secure canisters ... can we have them back now please? Or at the very least reinstate a more reasonable policy of NOT auto deleting them in deep space! ----- The Eve Client - A Love Story - The single biggest fix CCP ever did to Eve. Keep it up!
Solbright Advanced Security And Asset Protection	Posted - 2010.10.23 04:17:00 - [2] Edited by: Solbright on 23/10/2010 04:19:27 Originally by: Rakshasa Taisab Originally by: Solbright We finally have the real reason for the mass deletion of secure canisters ... can we have them back now please? Or at the very least reinstate a more reasonable policy of NOT auto deleting them in deep space! It was always more about in-space objects than item id's. The latter does not really affect much the loading of a system, the former does. The argument of server congestion never made any sense at all. Especially in the way the deletion was executed - Outright mass deletion of every seemingly derelict canister, including all unanchored structures and ships I think. There was never any need for everything to be wiped like that based on congestion arguments. Player observable performance wise, stuttering, was purely a client side issue so was always a false claim. This particular problem is solved by fixing the client. Which CCP have gone some way to achieving. The only solid explanation that would cause CCP to modify the game so dramatically from one of a sandbox to one of emptiness is the slow but fatal depletion of item IDs. ----- The Eve Client - A Love Story - The single biggest fix CCP ever did to Eve. Keep it up!
Solbright Advanced Security And Asset Protection	Posted - 2010.10.23 04:32:00 - [3] Edited by: Solbright on 23/10/2010 04:35:15 Originally by: Solbright The only solid explanation that would cause CCP to modify the game so dramatically from one of a sandbox to one of emptiness is the slow but fatal depletion of item IDs. That also explains why CCP laughed at the idea of only unlocking the cans, instead of deleting them, so that scavengers could go collecting them. Because that wouldn't have actually reduced the item count, well, not in the short term at least. ----- The Eve Client - A Love Story - The single biggest fix CCP ever did to Eve. Keep it up!
Solbright Advanced Security And Asset Protection	Posted - 2010.10.23 05:28:00 - [4] Edited by: Solbright on 23/10/2010 05:34:40 Originally by: Gerard Deneth Originally by: Solbright Player observable performance wise, stuttering, was purely a client side issue so was always a false claim. This particular problem is solved by fixing the client. Which CCP have gone some way to achieving. I dunno about you, but there wasn't much "false claim" whenever i warped into a belt with my lil' Osprey back in the day. True my machine wasn't a monster, but it was laggy as heck when I got into a belt. Ya, that was all client side stuttering though. Which makes it a false claim as to why CCP did the mass deletion. And I don't think CCP themselves ever claimed display stutter as a reason for the deletion by the way. It was just some whiners who thought it was a good idea to wipe out everything just because the client performed poorly with a little bit of clutter on the screen. ----- The Eve Client - A Love Story - The single biggest fix CCP ever did to Eve. Keep it up!
Solbright Advanced Security And Asset Protection	Posted - 2010.10.23 08:34:00 - [5] Grid load times, for cans back then at least, were mostly the client burdened with the effort of inserting the update packet into it's internal simulator. Which is quite different to the server sending it out since the server already has the content loaded in it's simulator. That was the embarrassing part - That the client would stall so badly on such a seemingly trivial operation. ----- The Eve Client - A Love Story - The single biggest fix CCP ever did to Eve. Keep it up!
Solbright Advanced Security And Asset Protection	Posted - 2010.10.23 11:25:00 - [6] Originally by: Matthew ... having to retrieve all the container info from the database every time someone jumps into the system because it doesn't all fit in the cache is NOT good for server performance). That may be a slightly reasonable reason for vacuuming the belts and gates (And I didn't have a problem with that part of the cleanup btw) but that's as far as that argument goes. The in-space data for a container is hardly substantial, memory is cheap, container contents isn't part of that data, or at least they shouldn't be. Again, scavengers could have done that job, if server congestion was the real problem then scavenging would have been a great solution. All in all, the mass deletion was a way overkill feature nerf that hopefully will at least be partly restored now. ----- The Eve Client - A Love Story - The single biggest fix CCP ever did to Eve. Keep it up!
Solbright Advanced Security And Asset Protection	Posted - 2010.10.23 13:56:00 - [7] Originally by: Mashie Saldana Tbh I don't care why they are deleted but I do prefer it now when it isn't a few hundred anchored cans in every belt turning them into yellow clouds. That's not the issue of concern here. What matters is all the other cans that were deleted along with the belt cans. ----- The Eve Client - A Love Story - The single biggest fix CCP ever did to Eve. Keep it up!
Solbright Advanced Security And Asset Protection	Posted - 2010.10.27 12:48:00 - [8] Originally by: Mashie Saldana Just visit your cans once a month and they will remain there as long as you are subscribed. The rather silly monthly requirement isn't even the problem. The real problem is they just vanish. There's no give in the system at all. It's truly pathetic. ----- The Eve Client - A Love Story - The single biggest fix CCP ever did to Eve. Keep it up!
Solbright Advanced Security And Asset Protection	Posted - 2010.10.28 11:34:00 - [9] Originally by: AC Tesla Seriously, visiting an ammo container once a month is too rigid. Thank you. Good to get some support. Secure cans can't be probed btw. But that's the sort of thing that should be introduced. Say, instead of deleting them, they are just unlocked. And when they are not locked they become probe-able just like ships are now. I'd also make it a six month timeout too. One month is an annoyingly short period if you are spending time in a number of different places. ----- The Eve Client - A Love Story - The single biggest fix CCP ever did to Eve. Keep it up!

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.