| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ambasador Neram Shahni
   |
Posted - 2011.03.21 20:05:00 -
[151]
 Originally by: Makumba Aki
Originally by: SunGodRa
Edited by: SunGodRa on 21/03/2011 18:29:35
Edited by: SunGodRa on 21/03/2011 17:52:56
Edited by: SunGodRa on 21/03/2011 17:50:07
ccp advert
in this video CCP says a battle between thousands of players. And its their advert. So CCP fix ur game. And then ur claims through adverts will be valid.
Also the thread wasnt about lag. Yes we know when we jump to every 020. As every one else. Its about the bugs of server side code. And one major bug is the inability for ur ship to dissapear from local after the 1' or 15' countdown.
Also CCP a suggestion. Reduce the number of fighters and fighter bombers. Make them 5 and only. Pump their hp and dps to match the 10 or 20 deployed by carriers and scs. Then the crashing and bugged bombers will be less and ur node performance will be improved.
For me as a paying costumer makes me angry that CCP has a jitanode of supporting 2k+. And they cant offer same nodes for large battles in 0.0.
Renault advert
You see, the cars are extremly safe. Go ahead and try such crash with a Renault. Should be safe right?
+1 to this idea just because there's nothing between fixing the game and this proposal except trolls who use inappropriate RL "analogies"
|
SunGodRa
Caldari
The Graduates
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 20:07:00 -
[152]
Edited by: SunGodRa on 21/03/2011 20:07:39
Originally by: Makumba Aki
Originally by: SunGodRa
Edited by: SunGodRa on 21/03/2011 18:29:35
Edited by: SunGodRa on 21/03/2011 17:52:56
Edited by: SunGodRa on 21/03/2011 17:50:07
ccp advert
in this video CCP says a battle between thousands of players. And its their advert. So CCP fix ur game. And then ur claims through adverts will be valid.
Also the thread wasnt about lag. Yes we know when we jump to every 020. As every one else. Its about the bugs of server side code. And one major bug is the inability for ur ship to dissapear from local after the 1' or 15' countdown.
Also CCP a suggestion. Reduce the number of fighters and fighter bombers. Make them 5 and only. Pump their hp and dps to match the 10 or 20 deployed by carriers and scs. Then the crashing and bugged bombers will be less and ur node performance will be improved.
For me as a paying costumer makes me angry that CCP has a jitanode of supporting 2k+. And they cant offer same nodes for large battles in 0.0.
Renault advert
You see, the cars are extremly safe. Go ahead and try such crash with a Renault. Should be safe right?
So u mean that they missleading us and they talk trush. We agree on that.
Ofc and they r trolls. Thats the reason they use alts.
|
Sati06
Caldari
hirr
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 20:21:00 -
[153]
Supported.
|
Hayden Vonn
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 20:25:00 -
[154]
SUPPORTED.
CCP is about to lose Customers. Because they can't provide the product they say they can.
Sov battles are not supportable by this company.
Either they have to set a hard limit for maximum number of players allowed on a node at any point in time so that lag is not a factor.
Or tey need to be able to stand behind their claims and support their nodes to the nth degree when size doesn't matter.
LAG losses are this companies responsibility period end of story. Your product can not do what you say it should be able to do and therefor CCP is responsible for that loss. One side can not effectivly fight the other. How exactly does CCP consider this a fair and legitimate loss? Really?
I'm at the point where I will not fly in large fleets because this company can not provide the environment where large fleets ca both act and fight at the same time in real time. This isn't a feature I am willing to continue to pay for and CCP continue to fail at providing.
Either you can do it or you can't. It works or it doesn't. I've paid for this feature for 6 years now and it still doesn't work? How much longer do you think I'm going to continue to pay for services that CCP can not provide? NOT LONG AT ALL CCP, NOT LONG AT ALL.
|
Schantalle
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 21:03:00 -
[155]
Edited by: Schantalle on 21/03/2011 21:05:46
Edited by: Schantalle on 21/03/2011 21:04:14
Quote:
ships shouldn't get blown up when the players that were controlling them get kicked from the game or don't even load the system
Best proposal ever. Not.
Just provide all the cowards with just another way to save their internet spaceships. Just in case anything goes wrong and the enemy actually shows up. Just another addition to your stupid blobbage and logoffski warfare.
Maybe stop cryin "IŠm gonna quit if you donŠt give me my carelessily lost ship back" and actually quit. Solves multiple problems at once.
|
Awesome Possum
Original Sin.
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 21:07:00 -
[156]
Edited by: Awesome Possum on 21/03/2011 21:08:22
this needs to be the absolute top priority on CCP's agenda. not incarna, not WIS, not highsec neutral RR mechanics, not drakes, not EVE-FPS, not World of Twilight, not fanfest, not AT9, not hiding cams in Stevie's bathroom, not superior white elephants, or new ship skins, or music videos, or chess boxing. every CCP employee, from the CEO to their illegal immigrant mexican janitors at the Georgia office need to be in on fixing the god damn lag.
♥
|
Schantalle
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 21:15:00 -
[157]
Just say it like you mean it:
"CCP, give us with all the ships that we carelessily lost back and just keep our enemies ships down."
Or isnŠt that politically correct enough for you?
|
Horizonist
Yulai Guard 2nd Fleet
Yulai Federation
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 21:17:00 -
[158]
Edited by: Horizonist on 21/03/2011 21:25:47
|
Brill Ama
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 21:22:00 -
[159]
Bump, Support, Agree. This issue has not changed or improved in 4+ years... Maybe it's time to set some priorities?
|
Schantalle
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 21:28:00 -
[160]
It already has priority at CCP.
This is just the same thing as everytime this entity loses a fight: players not getting the concepts of technical limitations into their strategies, loosing internet spaceships and assigning blame to CCP afterwards.
Tears Tears Tears.
Just imaginge the tears that would be spawned by a technetium rebalance. Hilarious.
|
|
|
SpaceAvenger
Caldari
Shiva
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 21:35:00 -
[161]
supported.
we pay for a fun and functional service, please hold up your end of the bargain, ccp.
|
Makumba Aki
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 21:38:00 -
[162]
Edited by: Makumba Aki on 21/03/2011 21:39:45
Originally by: Schantalle
Edited by: Schantalle on 21/03/2011 21:31:16
It already has priority at CCP.
This is just the same thing as everytime this entity loses a fight: players not getting the concepts of technical limitations into their strategies, loosing internet spaceships and assigning blame to CCP afterwards.
Tears Tears Tears.
Just imaginge the tears that would be spawned by a technetium rebalance. Hilarious. IŠd really like to know the specious arguments that would be provided by the same group of players...
Something like:
Thank you CCP! You first let our ships die in lag and then take our tech so we can't replace them and have to buy GTC. Money is the only thing you care about, don't you?
|
Schantalle
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 21:42:00 -
[163]
Edited by: Schantalle on 21/03/2011 21:45:16
Edited by: Schantalle on 21/03/2011 21:43:54
Hahaaaahahahahahahaaa
So where are the DRF tears?
They also died in lag and - oh wonder - donŠt have tech to replace their losses for free.
ShouldnŠt they cry for some free ships first?
Oh wait... this is the moment someone plays the "evil botter empire" card, right?
|
Kequamar
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 21:49:00 -
[164]
Supported... One thing to die in a fair fleet fight another to die when your not in game please fix fleet battles!
|
Makumba Aki
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 21:55:00 -
[165]
Originally by: Kequamar
Supported... One thing to die in a fair fleet fight another to die when your not in game please fix fleet battles!
Especially when Goons refuse to show up in order to crash the node and post funny gifs and internal chat logs on kugu instead.
|
Schantalle
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 22:00:00 -
[166]
Since when is "fair fight" the new agenda for the NC?
Oh wait.. it isnŠt. Nice pun.
|
Finious Boggs
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 22:30:00 -
[167]
Funny thing, I never said just the N/C. I think anyone that lost a ship to these pitiful conditions, should get there ship replace. Yes anyone! But that would be good service. Something CCP seriously has a problem with.
|
Al Irksome
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 22:32:00 -
[168]
Totally agree with this - there is absolutely no fun in big fleet battles because of lags. CCP needs to fix this - even if it means breaking the fight up into a number of sub fights - I suspect that simple math (n in fleet - n*n interactions) means that CCP can't even keep up as it is.
Al Irksome
|
Cassus Temon
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 22:55:00 -
[169]
I agree that a bit of node lag is a problem; and more so, when it involves a fleet battle. EVE is about that, right? ..at least, a small part of it is. Don't give me this crap; about it not being Massively Multi-player though. When was the last time you saw an MMO, (aside from EVE); that could get more than 20 players in the same instance, without lag occuring. Right. Never.
Fleet battles are, however, an advertised; and celebrated, part of 0.0 life in EVE. They should be more easily managed; and nodes should be capable of handling them. The problem is, reinforced or not; the nodes, and servers they are attached to, don't have the ability to handle the **** you guys throw at them. When CCP comes out with a fix, or buys a bunch of new/better servers; 0.0 decides it's time to up the ante, and brings another 1000 people. That's the real problem.
Goonswarm is what, now; something like 5900 members? Fleet battles occur; with excess of what, 3000 players? You guys are killing not just each other; but the servers meant to handle the battle, and resulting load. Sure, they can be better.
I could, and very nearly have, designed servers; that exceed the specifications, of the ones IBM designed to CCP's specifications. They would be marginally more costly; but could, handle the load required, as things stand. The problem is, that the 0.0 crowd, would just seat another 1500 pilots; and we'd be back to where we were before. The problem with ship loss, and log outs; I understand; can be annoying. Chances are, you lost it anyway; and just don't know it. Are you sure client-side hardware has nothing to do with that; at least, in some small part?
Here's the deal. Lag sucks, but your computer and the servers can handle it, (mostly); but when you get alpha'd, suddenly that little bit of code that handles Client-side details, skips a beat. Everything was fine, until your client-side data exploded; right before your ship decided to, and your client froze. Okay.. pure speculation.
I do know, however, that that little login glitch; so often described here, happens one out of 10 times, I log-in. It doesn't matter where I am. Here's the key. It's a minor little bug, or memory leak; that just crap's out, when you load your client. Call it Internet traffic, downstream gateway's, and IP Routing, or whatever; but, somehow, the messages don't all get through, and your client doesn't entirely load. Now, I've personally got about 20 down, and 1 up; and it doesn't get any better, without spending over $1000 on my connection. That's the limit, on local Highspeed, on the up-side; and about 4 shy, on the down-side, around here. Causes some problems, and a few dropped connections with Ventrilo and EVE; when the local traffic constricts the flow. That's not the problem. Somewhere, down the pipeline, things are jamming up; and traffic is bottlenecking, and packet loss is occurring. Not often; but enough. Could a fix to the client, cure this? I have no idea. I am pretty sure, a bit of code could be cleaned up; and better optimized for throughput. Client-side code. But that's all.
How does that cause you to take 4 hours to log in? It doesn't; and that's the point. What's causing 4 hour log in times; is you insistence on bringing everybody to the party. Pushing the servers, beyond expectations; and consistently, organizing bigger, and more demanding fleet battles. I'm not sure that's fixable.
|
Seras Ronon
The Graduates
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 23:18:00 -
[170]
supported
|
|
|
Arklan1
Fleet Coordination Commission
|
Posted - 2011.03.21 23:26:00 -
[171]
Originally by: Awesome Possum
Edited by: Awesome Possum on 21/03/2011 21:08:22
this needs to be the absolute top priority on CCP's agenda. not incarna, not WIS, not highsec neutral RR mechanics, not drakes, not EVE-FPS, not World of Twilight, not fanfest, not AT9, not hiding cams in Stevie's bathroom, not superior white elephants, or new ship skins, or music videos, or chess boxing. every CCP employee, from the CEO to their illegal immigrant mexican janitors at the Georgia office need to be in on fixing the god damn lag.
you want... the janitors... working on the code. wow. just... wow. what is he gonna do? keep the keyboard clean? maybe warm the chair at night?
|
Cas Ca'Dego
|
Posted - 2011.03.22 00:01:00 -
[172]
Fix it please. |
Pawnee
|
Posted - 2011.03.22 01:01:00 -
[173]
Edited by: Pawnee on 22/03/2011 01:01:47
I had recently a bug in win 7, which I already had in win 98. Unfortunately CCP and mass battles is the same story.
|
Bob TSlob
Caldari
The Graduates
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2011.03.22 01:07:00 -
[174]
*supported*
Here's my 2 cents on a fix that could help. Why not design an option that would require players entering a potentially overstressed node to use a different pared down version of Eve that would have much less in the way of stress on the server per player. Sure the graphics may be down to 1980s level and everything be oversimplified, but when we go into these 2000+ in local battles, we aren't there for the graphics, we are there for the results of the battle.
Dunno, may be a totally ******ed idea, but it's mine dammit |
danyalsun
|
Posted - 2011.03.22 03:02:00 -
[175]
Supported. You can jam your walking in stations where the sun don't shine. Fix the problems first.
|
Cash Warbash
Caldari
hirr
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2011.03.22 03:05:00 -
[176]
Once local hit 1600+ people; my commands were a average 18 minutes behind the action, when safe in A Blue POS my ship warped off 28 minutes later to the TCU, I couldn't stop the warp
|
Kindlin
|
Posted - 2011.03.22 04:21:00 -
[177]
Thank you for the post Vlade.
The DRF and NC players are suffering equally as a result of the game's inability to support their communities.
Ships should never be destroyed hours after the player logs.
Keep feeding the trolls. You can count on them to continuously bump the thread. |
SemiAs09
|
Posted - 2011.03.22 04:41:00 -
[178]
*supported*
|
ShortBusss
|
Posted - 2011.03.22 05:38:00 -
[179]
DRF shows there hate on eve.ru and evenews24. All the 1000+ opinions stay the same, need to fix lag and not make my characters pretty.
|
The Offerer
|
Posted - 2011.03.22 08:27:00 -
[180]
Edited by: The Offerer on 22/03/2011 08:30:47
Originally by: Schantalle
It already has priority at CCP.
This is just the same thing as everytime this entity loses a fight: players not getting the concepts of technical limitations into their strategies, loosing internet spaceships and assigning blame to CCP afterwards.
Tears Tears Tears.
Just imaginge the tears that would be spawned by a technetium rebalance. Hilarious. IŠd really like to know the specious arguments that would be provided by the same group of players...
It doesn't look like it's a priority. Like mentioned before on this thread, There is a game mechanic that was supposed to cover disconnects, server kicks and other nasty stuff - the 15 minute ship disappearing timer. Unplayable lag, server crashes and black screens started to b more frequent and intensive in Dominion. Since then, the only mechanical thing that got fixed (a couple of times) is desync. Other "fixes" were only cosmetic. Like rocket fix for example.... What? They needed that much time to change a couple of static database values? Come on. Hardly any effort at all.
But on the other hand, what was introduced that does have to do with mechanics? PI that's favourable to 0.0 players because of abundance of resources in 0.0 space and Incursions which is again favourable to 0.0 alliances because they can drop some very expensive stuff there. At the same time, level 4 missions got nerfed, NPC corporation taxes introduced, good quality agents give crappy missions if you work for them too much and they tend to send you in lowsec in your PvE fitted ship. Well, guess what... I want a taste of 0.0 space too, but how the hell can I move there if the damn thing is broken.
So, I got myself a situation here: stay in highsec and be bored to death, play docking games with wardec griefers (the most ******ed excuse for a PvP), enter FW which is meh anyway (oh... and broken), play like a "pirate" and sit on a gate while my eyes bleed shooting at the targets that can't defend themselves, or... finally... move to 0.0 where all the action is and where everyone is a fair target. For me, 0.0 is the end-game goal, but having tasted the lag when some of the alliances clashed in lowsec empire some time ago (and me not even being in that system for that matter), makes me wonder what crap do I have to endure in order to get some proper PvP experience in the lawless space in the game.
You see... I don't give a damn about Technetium. Change the bugger so it comes from moon interaction or something. I don't care about the "NC" or "DRF". I care about being able to play this game and having CUSTOMER SUPPORT.
edit: paragraphs
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |