EVE Search - So Time Dilation

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

So Time Dilation

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Captain Dreadshadow	Posted - 2011.04.11 23:52:00 - [1] With the new CSM letter I've found myself wondering about the idea of Time Dilation. From what I understood it is not a huge priority and should not be expected any time soon. That said, the idea has been recognized to have a good deal of potential from the CSM. I was not present at fan fest so I'm curious on what the feature would entail. Moreover, I'm curious what other benefits or hindrances this feature could possibly add. ex. more time for tactics and strategy or cripplingly painful long waits to move 100m so in a nutshell, do you think time dilation would be good for eve and what impact do you think it would have. how do you think the system should work, such as when does it kick in, how slow does it get? what systems should it effect? just the ships in space or the market orders to? (jita) was gonna post this in features and ideas but its more of a discussion (probably a mistake to try that ) now back to lurking.
Yuki Kulotsuki	Posted - 2011.04.11 23:56:00 - [2] Here's some potential issues: How dilation interacts with sov timers. How dilation interacts with siege/triage/log-off timers, particularly when you consider that reinforcements will not be subject to dilation until they arrive on the field. -- Did you know there's an alliance who's name you're not allowed to say, or website you're not allowed to link?
Dorian Wylde	Posted - 2011.04.12 00:20:00 - [3] Originally by: Yuki Kulotsuki Here's some potential issues: How dilation interacts with sov timers. How dilation interacts with siege/triage/log-off timers, particularly when you consider that reinforcements will not be subject to dilation until they arrive on the field. Says who? Nowhere in the blog did it say anything like that, and really it would be incredibly stupid to implement a program that static. And no, CCP would not, and has not done anything like that before. Time dilation will likely affect the entire grid, and anyone warping in will have the same effect as soon as the grid loads. It also clearly states that everything outside, like skill training, and obviously like sov timers, would not be affected.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2011.04.12 00:24:00 - [4] It has a lot of potential to be good, nay, even awesome. However, it has a lot of potential "failure points" (like the ones the second posted mentioned) which need to be very carefully checked for problems before going live. A fact which does not make me very happy, to say the least, and I hope I don't have to explain why. _ CCP LEADERSHIP MENTALITY NEEDS TO CHANGE FAST ! "New junky features sell, old polished content doesn't" ? KILL IT WITH FIRE.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.04.12 00:27:00 - [5] Originally by: Akita T It has a lot of potential to be good, nay, even awesome. However, it has a lot of potential "failure points" (like the ones the second posted mentioned) which need to be very carefully checked for problems before going live. A fact which does not make me very happy, to say the least, and I hope I don't have to explain why. yes I can see where you're going. I can also see the 3rd option which is CCP **ing it all up. --- Quote:** The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Copine Callmeknau Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams The KWFL Republic	Posted - 2011.04.12 00:28:00 - [6] Originally by: Dorian Wylde Originally by: Yuki Kulotsuki Here's some potential issues: How dilation interacts with sov timers. How dilation interacts with siege/triage/log-off timers, particularly when you consider that reinforcements will not be subject to dilation until they arrive on the field. Says who? Nowhere in the blog did it say anything like that, and really it would be incredibly stupid to implement a program that static. And no, CCP would not, and has not done anything like that before. Time dilation will likely affect the entire grid, and anyone warping in will have the same effect as soon as the grid loads. It also clearly states that everything outside, like skill training, and obviously like sov timers, would not be affected. well you did just there when you predicted it would only affect things on grid derpderp He's saying that if time dilation kicks in for system A, how is this going to affect reinforcements en route 5j away in systems X, Y and Z. If there is no dilation for these reinforcements, then from the point of view of people fighting in system A the reinforcements will arrive much much faster than they normally would. I dare say it would be a system wide thing at least, but this still creates issues for inbound reinforcements unless you make it affect say an entire region. Then you're going to have the problem of people not related to the battle at all being slowed down in whatever their normal activities are. Also would be interested to know if there is a max limit on time dilation, or if the server will just slow things down as much as it deems necessary. ie are we possibly going to see a 10x, 20x, or even 50x slowdown factor in the very largest of fights? ...oh wait Stunning EVE Online Theme for PS3
Irani Firecam Gallente Lords 0f Justice Fidelas Constans	Posted - 2011.04.12 00:30:00 - [7] Wait, so instead of a fight taking 6 hours due to lag, a fight now takes 6 hours due to time dilation? My Wallpaper
Yuki Kulotsuki	Posted - 2011.04.12 00:32:00 - [8] I was referring to reinforcements as in getting to the system. The ability to gather a fleet to drop on a sieged dread would benefit for the difference in time. ~~Obviously~~Hopefully the entire system would be effected. -- Did you know there's an alliance who's name you're not allowed to say, or website you're not allowed to link?
Terianna Eri Senex Legio Get Off My Lawn	Posted - 2011.04.12 00:32:00 - [9] I think time dilation is a pretty effective counter to the traditional complaint that fights in EVE are over too quickly - don't change anything, just make all the timers on everything twice as long I kid - it actually seems like a really good solution. I would gladly accept a 3x increase in the cycle time of everything (and of course similar effects applied to velocity, align time, warp speed, etc) if it meant that we could actually issue commands and have them be received in the right order. There is so much opportunity for tactics in fleet warfare that are made unviable just because they are too complex to be carried out in high-lag situations. ________________ Originally by: CCP Incognito PS the "time to P*nis" is the shortest time recorded in human history. :)
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2011.04.12 00:35:00 - [10] Originally by: Irani Firecam Wait, so instead of a fight taking 6 hours due to lag, a fight now takes 6 hours due to time dilation? Well, ideally, instead of getting into a fight where nobody can do anything for almost 6 hours and then calling it quits gradually, a fight which would have probably taken 1.5-3 hours to complete if it would have taken place on magic hardware, it will last 3-6 hours BUT everything WILL go well, j u s t ... i n ... s l o w ... m o t i o n. At least that's the desired outcome. _ CCP LEADERSHIP MENTALITY NEEDS TO CHANGE FAST ! "New junky features sell, old polished content doesn't" ? KILL IT WITH FIRE.
Jon Taggart State War Academy	Posted - 2011.04.12 00:39:00 - [11] Originally by: Akita T Originally by: Irani Firecam Wait, so instead of a fight taking 6 hours due to lag, a fight now takes 6 hours due to time dilation? Well, ideally, instead of getting into a fight where nobody can do anything for almost 6 hours and then calling it quits gradually, a fight which would have probably taken 1.5-3 hours to complete if it would have taken place on magic hardware, it will last 3-6 hours BUT everything WILL go well, j u s t ... i n ... s l o w ... m o t i o n. At least that's the desired outcome. Reminds me of playing Supreme Commander with the 1000 unit cap. Everything slows down to the point of torture. I just stop playing anyway . I'm not an alt
Irani Firecam Gallente Lords 0f Justice Fidelas Constans	Posted - 2011.04.12 00:41:00 - [12] Originally by: Akita T j u s t ... i n ... s l o w ... m o t i o n. This feature is already implemented in lag 1.0Ö. My Wallpaper
Copine Callmeknau Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams The KWFL Republic	Posted - 2011.04.12 00:46:00 - [13] Originally by: Irani Firecam Originally by: Akita T j u s t ... i n ... s l o w ... m o t i o n. This feature is already implemented in lag 1.0Ö. nawwww lag 1.0 is like, really old style stop-motion. You miss bits here and there lag 2.0: The Time Dilator. Is more like super sexy 50k FPS camera slowmo, nothing gets missed, just takes forever. ...oh wait Stunning EVE Online Theme for PS3
J Kunjeh Gallente	Posted - 2011.04.12 00:48:00 - [14] Time Dilation is a great idea...the only fair way to deal with the lag problem until it's solved. I would love a geeky Dev blog about how it might be implemented (and how it might work technically speaking) ~Gnosis~
Grey Stormshadow Starwreck Industries	Posted - 2011.04.12 00:50:00 - [15] Originally by: Copine Callmeknau well you did just there when you predicted it would only affect things on grid derpderp He's saying that if time dilation kicks in for system A, how is this going to affect reinforcements en route 5j away in systems X, Y and Z. If there is no dilation for these reinforcements, then from the point of view of people fighting in system A the reinforcements will arrive much much faster than they normally would. I dare say it would be a system wide thing at least, but this still creates issues for inbound reinforcements unless you make it affect say an entire region. Then you're going to have the problem of people not related to the battle at all being slowed down in whatever their normal activities are. Also would be interested to know if there is a max limit on time dilation, or if the server will just slow things down as much as it deems necessary. ie are we possibly going to see a 10x, 20x, or even 50x slowdown factor in the very largest of fights? As I see it, only system wide time dilation would work... Also when time dilation kicks in, system should start calculating time difference to adjacent systems and set delay timers to those who try to warp into the system (preferably with some promt "you're about to enter a system which is under time dilation, click yes if you want to enter the que... current wait time 6 minutes 34 secons). This is the only way to counter the reinforcement problem as far I see it. ------------------------------------------------- Play with the best - die like the rest starwreck.com - support the cause :)
Phocas Lebournes Northbridge Services Group	Posted - 2011.04.12 00:51:00 - [16] Originally by: Captain Dreadshadow Edited by: Captain Dreadshadow on 12/04/2011 00:01:46 With the new CSM letter I've found myself wondering about the idea of Time Dilation. From what I understood it is not a huge priority and should not be expected any time soon. That said, the idea has been recognized to have a good deal of potential from the CSM. I was not present at fan fest so I'm curious on what the feature would entail. Moreover, I'm curious what other benefits or hindrances this feature could possibly add. ex. more time for tactics and strategy or cripplingly painful long waits to move 100m so in a nutshell, do you think time dilation would be good for eve and what impact do you think it would have. how do you think the system should work, such as when does it kick in, how slow does it get? what systems should it effect? just the ships in space or the market orders to? (jita) was gonna post this in features and ideas but its more of a discussion (probably a mistake to try that ) If you ever were in a large fleet battle then you know that time dilation has already been implemented.
Starke Mandalore	Posted - 2011.04.12 01:19:00 - [17] This would be a very meaty change to the mechanics of Eve, and not to be taken lightly. On one hand, a change like this would take a long time to implement, and is certain to have some pretty nasty bugs included in it - and I'm sure someone will find ways to exploit the initial versions. That said, I am hugely in favor of this. It would render large fights far more fun and far more fair, at the cost of more time. My only concern is the magnitude of the slowdown - right now everyone is talking about x2-x3 slowdowns; what if the very largest fights reached x10 slowdown? Even then I would support this, but it is worth noting that a x10 slowdown may not be unrealistic.
Calathea Sata State War Academy	Posted - 2011.04.12 01:26:00 - [18] Time Dilation will not work. Formalizing lag as a game mechanic, really? That is really, really the worst way possible of fixing the problem, the problem of "whoever brings the most wins thus making everyone blobing as big a blob as possible". It will not fix the problem, only easing the syndrome, simply because of people will always try to bring as many as possible into the fight and the system will always be stretched outside its limit. Formalizing lag (Time Dilation) can ony ease out that much of lag and people will just keep bringing in more and more people until the server cannot afford the workload again. Moreover, it simply sounds ridiculous and immersion breaking. Lag is a natural product of the current game design itself: the fantasy of unlimited numbers of ship fighting together vs the realistic capabilities of the internet and the servers. As long as bringing as many ships into the fight as possible means easier wins, people will do it. Time Dilation won't work. Instead CCP should think about the game design itself: is the concept of an unlimited amount of ships fighting realistic? Perhaps 1000 vs 1000 will not be too different than 2000 vs 2000 simply because the screen and overview cannot contain that much information? Perhaps it is not 1000 but 500? How should we discourage people going over 500, maybe we can create some mechanisms to eliminate the advantages of bringing in more than 500 ships? Etc etc, I am only illustrating an example. I am sure there are better ideas than this one; I am sure someone can think of many more better ideas. But Time Dilation is the worst solution possible.
Calathea Sata State War Academy	Posted - 2011.04.12 01:39:00 - [19] Lag cannot be solved, only designed out Lag will always be present as long as the mechanics do not change: people will just bring in more and more until the server breaks, even if the server can run 10x faster than now. The game mechanics itself is to blame, not the coding or network itself (but it is relevant). I think it is not a hard concept to understand. The game mechanics simply need to be designed to accommodate realistic numbers. Instead of not limiting the number of ships on grid at all (which simply encourages bigger and bigger blobs) there should be at least some sort of discouragement of simply spamming quantity of ships(it is pretty stupid to be honest), if not hard limits on the game itself (max number of friendlies on-grid, max number of ships doing effective DPS to a target, etc). The game needs designed, unlike the current "no design" design which will always, always be broken by bigger and bigger blobs.
J Kunjeh Gallente	Posted - 2011.04.12 01:44:00 - [20] Calathea Sata, you're incorrect about time dilation being unworkable. I'm sure it can be scaled...the more ships that enter the fight, the more it dilates..simple. I do however agree that maybe there are some game design changes that could be made that would help the situation as well. ~Gnosis~
J Kunjeh Gallente	Posted - 2011.04.12 01:53:00 - [21] From CCP Veritas in another thread: Quote: I'll ruin the surprise - the idea is to dynamically slow down time as the server needs in order to remain responsive. There'll probably have to be a limit somewhere, but I can't say where that'll be...I'll probably need to do some trial 'n' error on that one to find a happy balance. ~Gnosis~
Calathea Sata State War Academy	Posted - 2011.04.12 01:54:00 - [22] Originally by: J Kunjeh Calathea Sata, you're incorrect about time dilation being unworkable. I'm sure it can be scaled...the more ships that enter the fight, the more it dilates..simple. I do however agree that maybe there are some game design changes that could be made that would help the situation as well. Of cause it can be scaled. I will simply bring in enough so that it cannot be slowed further, then bring 2x on top of it and watch the game lag in slow motion (Oh god.); there is nothing stopping me from doing that because in the end of the day, more ships = win.
Irani Firecam Gallente Lords 0f Justice Fidelas Constans	Posted - 2011.04.12 01:58:00 - [23] Somehow, screaming 'time dilation!' on teamspeak doesn't have quite the same ring as 'lag!'. My Wallpaper
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2011.04.12 02:02:00 - [24] Well, it's the lesser of several evils, sort of. Since CCP obviously can't find a workable way to encourage splitting up (even if suggestions to that extent were given, not without their share of problems though, granted), the next best thing appears to be slow-motion fights. I don't know about you, but between slideshow-without-control and slow-mo-with-control, I'd almost always pick the latter. _ CCP LEADERSHIP MENTALITY NEEDS TO CHANGE FAST ! "New junky features sell, old polished content doesn't" ? KILL IT WITH FIRE.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.04.12 02:02:00 - [25] Originally by: Calathea Sata Originally by: J Kunjeh Calathea Sata, you're incorrect about time dilation being unworkable. I'm sure it can be scaled...the more ships that enter the fight, the more it dilates..simple. I do however agree that maybe there are some game design changes that could be made that would help the situation as well. Of cause it can be scaled. I will simply bring in enough so that it cannot be slowed further, then bring 2x on top of it and watch the game lag in slow motion (Oh god.); there is nothing stopping me from doing that because in the end of the day, more ships = win. in the end, all we can do is minimize how lag affects the game. while anti-blob mechanisms have been proposed time and time again, you should know that any artificial limitation will be exploitable so that way isn't really an option. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
J Kunjeh Gallente	Posted - 2011.04.12 02:14:00 - [26] Originally by: Akita T Since CCP obviously can't find a workable way to encourage splitting up (even if suggestions to that extent were given, not without their share of problems though, granted), the next best thing appears to be slow-motion fights. Can you point me to a few threads that discuss this? I'm very interested in reading some of the ideas floating around about how to reduce lag through game mechanics. ~Gnosis~
Mister Short	Posted - 2011.04.12 02:19:00 - [27] I endorse this product and or service
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2011.04.12 02:27:00 - [28] Edited by: Akita T on 12/04/2011 02:29:35 Originally by: J Kunjeh Originally by: Akita T even if suggestions to that extent were given, not without their share of problems though, granted Can you point me to a few threads that discuss this? I'm very interested in reading some of the ideas floating around about how to reduce lag through game mechanics. The "Features and Ideas Discussion" subforum is chock-full of those, they keep popping up all the time but with very little talk in each of them. You can find a wide range of ideas like, for instance (selecting a few which might actually have some merit) : * applying some "stack-nerf" effect on damage dealt to a single target from multiple sources * introducing some radically simplified form of line of sight damage blocking * increasing locking time, decreasing number of lockable targets or even grid-wide low-level ECM-like effects the more ships are on grid, or just in a certain section of a grid * creating a potentially large number of relatively minor objectives that have to be accomplished more or less at the same time (but in different grids//systems) in typical fleet combat offense/defense situations ...and so on and so forth. _ CCP LEADERSHIP MENTALITY NEEDS TO CHANGE FAST ! "New junky features sell, old polished content doesn't" ? KILL IT WITH FIRE.
Chainsaw Plankton IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2011.04.12 02:34:00 - [29] I would imagine time dilation would be system wide. that and I think ccp needs to introduce objectives that can actually be completed by a small gang, encouraging you to spread out your fleet instead of concentrating everything at one point. sitting in one spot just bashing away at hp is boring, but at the same time need to avoid timezone pingpong.
Tu Ko	Posted - 2011.04.12 02:42:00 - [30] I have nothing against 'Time Dilation' idea as far as a concept, but to be quite honest CCP's track record on making features work is very poor. I am also concerned with this mechanic being exploited by using cyno to pull a capital off field mid battle, get it repaired and back in to the same fight, in what to the people effected by time dilation a few cycles. Not to mention hotdropped capitals will in theory be fully loaded and able to issue commands by perspective more quickly. I am going to come back to the theory I have been pitching for a while now. Get rid of the SOV structures entirely and we will not have these server killing blobs. If I cannot tell my alliance and it's associated blues the exact hour of a fight then we cannot take the time to organize up to blob and that brings the fights down to a scale thats mobile and localized. Obviously, caps are mobile and can be brought in with a quick click of a mouse, but getting 50+ cap pilots ready to be deployed at a specific moment takes planning. Changing the SOV mechanic to being something active will require the alliances to spread out timezone wise and possiblly deploy heavier hardware without having the guarantee they are going to outnumber the target.
ivar R'dhak Minmatar	Posted - 2011.04.12 02:46:00 - [31] Originally by: Akita T * introducing some radically simplified form of line of sight damage blocking Preferably with added brutal line of sight friendly fire mechanics. I still believe this would be the best that could ever happen to EVE. Would of course make some type of formation flying client command necessary. It should make the current blob much more difficult to manage, thus force the use of actual 3d tactics and smaller gangs to make the tactics humanly executable. But I¦m pessimistic that there is enough mathemagical expertise at CCP to pull such a rabbit out of the hat, so the servers would be able to compute such a thing. ______________ Mal-¦Appears we got here just in a nick of time. What does that make us?¦ Zoe-`Big damn heroes, sir.` Mal-¦Aint we just.¦
Rikburn	Posted - 2011.04.12 03:17:00 - [32] Previous discussion had some interesting diversions in it too.
Riley Moore Sentinum Research	Posted - 2011.04.12 03:25:00 - [33] Lag as a feature! Brilliant jokes aside, it does have pottential. Just slowing everything down 20% would reduce server load a LOT
Copine Callmeknau Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams The KWFL Republic	Posted - 2011.04.12 04:15:00 - [34] Originally by: ivar R'dhak Originally by: Akita T * introducing some radically simplified form of line of sight damage blocking Preferably with added brutal line of sight friendly fire mechanics. I still believe this would be the best that could ever happen to EVE. Would of course make some type of formation flying client command necessary. It should make the current blob much more difficult to manage, thus force the use of actual 3d tactics and smaller gangs to make the tactics humanly executable. But I¦m pessimistic that there is enough mathemagical expertise at CCP to pull such a rabbit out of the hat, so the servers would be able to compute such a thing. Feel free to explain how 1k ships flying in cpu intensive formations is less laggy than a 1k man blob/ball of ships. What you assume people won't bring the numbers? derpderp people will just warp wings/fleets to different tactical bookmarks in order to avoid the LoS/friendly fire issues. The only difference this will make is that you'll see squads of covops ships in addition to the normal blob, in order to provide warpin locations. ...oh wait Stunning EVE Online Theme for PS3
Misanth RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE	Posted - 2011.04.12 04:23:00 - [35] Originally by: Akita T Edited by: Akita T on 12/04/2011 02:29:35 Originally by: J Kunjeh Originally by: Akita T even if suggestions to that extent were given, not without their share of problems though, granted Can you point me to a few threads that discuss this? I'm very interested in reading some of the ideas floating around about how to reduce lag through game mechanics. The "Features and Ideas Discussion" subforum is chock-full of those, they keep popping up all the time but with very little talk in each of them. You can find a wide range of ideas like, for instance (selecting a few which might actually have some merit) : * applying some "stack-nerf" effect on damage dealt to a single target from multiple sources * introducing some radically simplified form of line of sight damage blocking * increasing locking time, decreasing number of lockable targets or even grid-wide low-level ECM-like effects the more ships are on grid, or just in a certain section of a grid * creating a potentially large number of relatively minor objectives that have to be accomplished more or less at the same time (but in different grids//systems) in typical fleet combat offense/defense situations ...and so on and so forth. My own, and a personal favourite (yes I'm neutral like that) is; * change fleet bonuses so that you recieve 100% effect up to 11 players (sc + squad). Each squad you add to the fleet from that point will reduce fleet bonuses by 5%. Having 349508395 fleets might still be able to coordinate on voice coms. But try do the fleet warps, broadcasts, cynos, etc. -
Diomedes Calypso	Posted - 2011.04.12 04:27:00 - [36] I think that some way of failing gracefully has got to be a high priorty. They have made a lot of progress on some of the worst areas of disparity.. session changes aren't as momumentally unbalanced (still are sometimes.. just not as bad as they were) The time dilation has its merits but, I think its probably a more complicated approach. A few simple blodges could do far more I'd think In "fleet conditions" a disclosed arbitrary threshold that "could" trigger a different set of dynamics (not certainly) time and space could mystically make drones and missles stop to function and no wrecks appear. The blodge could come in allowing different modules to be fit... using missle and drone skills with bonuses to types of ships that currently bonus missles and drones. A new sort of heavy missle launcher could funtion basically exactly like an autocanon ..... a dronebay filled instead with an unlauncable drone could work as a target navigation computer and boost turret and/or launcer related damage... with a greater boost if equipped on ships previously built for drone advantage. Reducing the number of items floating aroud on a grid and calculating relative speed and position has got to be one of the largest strains in large battles...
Kyra Felann Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.04.12 04:37:00 - [37] Originally by: ivar R'dhak Originally by: Akita T * introducing some radically simplified form of line of sight damage blocking Preferably with added brutal line of sight friendly fire mechanics. I still believe this would be the best that could ever happen to EVE. Would of course make some type of formation flying client command necessary. It should make the current blob much more difficult to manage, thus force the use of actual 3d tactics and smaller gangs to make the tactics humanly executable. This would be so awesome--actual maneuver and tactics being necessary instead of just blobbing and shooting at targets one after another. sighs dreamily -----WARNING SIGNATURE BELOW----- Bring back the NeoNeoCom!
stoicfaux Gallente	Posted - 2011.04.12 05:16:00 - [38] Is the lag caused by the server's inability to track each action or is the lag caused by the need to send and coordinate messages to the clients? If lag is caused by client messaging then time dilation won't make a dent in the problem because the number of messages increases geometrically. Meaning, if you double the number of participants, then the amount of messages being sent is squared instead of simply doubled. 100 ships performing 100 actions total will require that 10,000 messages be sent to all the clients. Double the ships to 200 and that becomes 40,000 messages. Double again to 400 clients and 400 actions and you get 160,000 messages being sent to the clients. Judging from past dev blogs, CCP has focused on optimizing network traffic, reducing the number of messages being sent to the client, and minimizing the object overhead required to track each action. I get the feeling that time dilation won't provide the expected benefits. ----- "Are you a sociopathic paranoid schizophrenic with accounting skills? We have the game for you! -- Eve, the game of Alts, Economics, Machiavelli, and PvP"
Dalketh	Posted - 2011.04.12 05:25:00 - [39] There is something in the game that doesn't make you happy!!?!? Wow that's a shocker. "Don't worry - be happy!" Originally by: Akita T A fact which does not make me very happy, to say the least, and I hope I don't have to explain why.
Yuki Kulotsuki	Posted - 2011.04.12 05:27:00 - [40] Originally by: stoicfaux Judging from past dev blogs, CCP has focused on optimizing network traffic, reducing the number of messages being sent to the client, and minimizing the object overhead required to track each action. I get the feeling that time dilation won't provide the expected benefits. It was more along the lines of streamlining the data objects and getting those to serialize properly. The biggest hiccup is supposedly in processing the queue of actions in time. Messaging wasn't as big of an issue. That's my reading from the blogs. -- Did you know there's an alliance who's name you're not allowed to say, or website you're not allowed to link?
Copine Callmeknau Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams The KWFL Republic	Posted - 2011.04.12 05:28:00 - [41] Originally by: stoicfaux Is the lag caused by the server's inability to track each action or is the lag caused by the need to send and coordinate messages to the clients? If lag is caused by client messaging then time dilation won't make a dent in the problem because the number of messages increases geometrically. Meaning, if you double the number of participants, then the amount of messages being sent is squared instead of simply doubled. 100 ships performing 100 actions total will require that 10,000 messages be sent to all the clients. Double the ships to 200 and that becomes 40,000 messages. Double again to 400 clients and 400 actions and you get 160,000 messages being sent to the clients. Judging from past dev blogs, CCP has focused on optimizing network traffic, reducing the number of messages being sent to the client, and minimizing the object overhead required to track each action. I get the feeling that time dilation won't provide the expected benefits. Exactly, and the plan is to decrease the amount of messages in a given period of time. So it's still processing a million requests, now it would have say 20min to do it in instead of 10min. Effectively halving the server/bandwidth load It's basically nerfing the 'alpha' of all the requests, so that the servers don't get instapopped ...oh wait Stunning EVE Online Theme for PS3
Merin Ryskin Peregrine Industries	Posted - 2011.04.12 05:31:00 - [42] Originally by: Akita T You can find a wide range of ideas like, for instance (selecting a few which might actually have some merit) : * applying some "stack-nerf" effect on damage dealt to a single target from multiple sources * increasing locking time, decreasing number of lockable targets or even grid-wide low-level ECM-like effects the more ships are on grid, or just in a certain section of a grid The problem with these is that they're completely arbitrary penalties, and a really lazy way of doing things. Bringing more ships is a good strategy, so simply declaring "blobbing is not allowed" is just going to annoy those players who don't find a way to exploit whatever un-intuitive penalties are applied. Quote: * creating a potentially large number of relatively minor objectives that have to be accomplished more or less at the same time (but in different grids//systems) in typical fleet combat offense/defense situations This is the only way to remove blobbing: make it so that blobbing is no longer a desirable strategy in the first place. Of course given CCP's hilariously unprofessional ideas about "excellence", I'm not going to bet anything that they are capable of making this kind of fundamental change. Most likely we'll just get a "small gang warfare" expansion which consists of scannable combat arenas which are supposed to influence sovereignty someday (not working at the moment, just have fun testing the concept). And then, like faction warfare, the whole thing will be forgotten in favor of making the next impressive-sounding "feature". As for the people who dislike the idea of time dilation, I would really like to see your proposed alternatives to dealing with the hardware issues which cause lag. Because, you know what? There aren't any. Either you accept some form of time dilation, or you just accept that crippling lag is going to happen. I don't know about you, but I'd rather play the game at half speed than not be able to play it at all. -----------
Armon Ral	Posted - 2011.04.12 08:05:00 - [43] Seems like slowing everything down would be unnecessary - just increase server tick time by factor of two and poof there's twice as much time to process everything. No slowdown, just a little less responsive - two seconds instead of one.
RedClaws Amarr Black Serpent Technologies R.A.G.E	Posted - 2011.04.12 08:32:00 - [44] I think this is a great idea. At least a good pilot would be able to show he's good instead of just waiting 10 minutes to see what has happened and finding out he got podded. Nobody has fun in this case. And to answer the worries of reinforcements arriving faster I would say : if you're lagged out you won't be able to do anything either so reinforcements will still arrive at about the same time. Very much looking forward to this.
Chaos Incarnate Faceless Logistics	Posted - 2011.04.12 09:16:00 - [45] Edited by: Chaos Incarnate on 12/04/2011 09:18:09 Originally by: Akita T Edited by: Akita T on 12/04/2011 02:29:35 Originally by: J Kunjeh Originally by: Akita T even if suggestions to that extent were given, not without their share of problems though, granted Can you point me to a few threads that discuss this? I'm very interested in reading some of the ideas floating around about how to reduce lag through game mechanics. The "Features and Ideas Discussion" subforum is chock-full of those, they keep popping up all the time but with very little talk in each of them. You can find a wide range of ideas like, for instance (selecting a few which might actually have some merit) : * applying some "stack-nerf" effect on damage dealt to a single target from multiple sources * introducing some radically simplified form of line of sight damage blocking * increasing locking time, decreasing number of lockable targets or even grid-wide low-level ECM-like effects the more ships are on grid, or just in a certain section of a grid * creating a potentially large number of relatively minor objectives that have to be accomplished more or less at the same time (but in different grids//systems) in typical fleet combat offense/defense situations ...and so on and so forth. there's never any discussion because they're older than dirt and half are terrible stacknerfing damage is impossible to balance properly with reps - you have to somehow stacknerf reps and resistance vs damage incoming so that damage incoming wins, otherwise ships that can take the alpha never die...but if damage always wins, reps are kinda useless; you can't 'save' anyone, just delay the inevitable. Oh, and it makes noobs useless. Line of sight blocking is computationally intensive and would probably do little to stop blobbing locktime penalties aren't so bad, but because the server can't really cleanly distinguish between 'friends' and 'enemies' in a way that isn't exploitable it has to affect everyone. And knowing CCP, you'll probably wind up with people ejecting dozens of shuttles to nerf locktime or subcap fleets piling in next to enemy supercarriers and titans so they can't lock anything... splitting fleets via multiple targets is also not so bad, but it's very hard to properly do it. Even with sov objectives split up, people will converge rapidly on an ongoing fight escalating it to the point where the server breaks. The only reliable way to split fleets is some form of instancing imho, and that'll always be wildly unpopular. edit: Time dilation isn't the solution to lag, but it's a good stopgap measure that'll ensure the evils of lag are distributed fairly. CCP Veritas has been pushing for it for awhile now, it should really happen tbh. _____________________ Look down. Back up. Where are you? You're on a forum, with the alt your alt could post like.
Valator Uel Caldari Mercenaries of Andosia Northern Coalition.	Posted - 2011.04.12 09:26:00 - [46] As for the reinforcements problem, Time Dilation (TD) could have a knock-on effect on directly adjacent systems. For instance, if the system where the fight is taking place has a 5min delay on everything then adjacent systems could have a 2min delay and their adjacent systems a 1min delay. Otherwise I see TD to be bias to larger forces. EVE is notorious for lagging even with small number of pilots and would make hit-'n-run almost impossible to do if reinforcements are not slowed down. Instead of taking 10min to do a quick drive-by shooting you end up in a TD of 30min. It gives reinforcements 20 extra minutes to get to your system or camp exit gates. However if they are delayed in the nth-adjacent systems they will arrive "on time" when the main fleet's TD "ends". ------------------ empty sig
Rellik B00n Lethal Death Squad	Posted - 2011.04.12 09:27:00 - [47] Originally by: Terianna Eri it actually seems like a really good solution. I would gladly accept a 3x increase in the cycle time of everything (and of course similar effects applied to velocity, align time, warp speed, etc) if it meant that we could actually issue commands and have them be received in the right order. There is so much opportunity for tactics in fleet warfare that are made unviable just because they are too complex to be carried out in high-lag situations. no offense to you personally but your quote covers things i need: one of the worst changes EVER was the double HP buff CCP applied to all ships a few years back. Gone (mostly) was the Gank-gtfo option as most fights doubled in length. See where this is going? Doubling the timers on everything is effectively another double hp buff. Double hp buff was **ing **e. Not a good idea. . -IRON MIKE IS hi sec lolwarrior-
GeeShizzle MacCloud Caldari	Posted - 2011.04.12 09:40:00 - [48] Edited by: GeeShizzle MacCloud on 12/04/2011 09:41:23 people should read up on the "i have fixed lag" assembly hall discussion before starting up a new and totally irrelevent thread about it! yes i know maybe some of you hadnt seen it and didnt realise it was there, asnd so for you lot, go check it out here pretty much all of the questions asked in this forum have been discussed and explained in the thread. pretty much every angle people have on it has been looked at. Of course if you do have a 'new' angle no ones thought of ur welcome to express it and discuss it! but i do stress the word 'NEW'! much of the current design of sov i do agree is a little screwwed up and forces blob warfare. but blob warfare is NOT the trump all card. massive lag + blob warfare is. and it is in everyones interests to remove this! forcing a removal of blob warfare is almost the equivalent of infringing eve citizens rights to do things their way. blob warfare can be defeated with proper tactics and a responsive server. breaking up sov requirement to fight on multiple grids in the same system doesnt do anything to reduce lag at all. breaking up sov fights to multiple systems around each other doesnt reduce lag cause all of the server request for every client will still be on the same server. reducing client calls to the server will reduce lag. and thats what time dialation will do. people discussing the possibility of x50 or more time dialation is taking situations to the extreme. a x2 dialation will reduce request calls to the server by 25% to 50% so long as everyone is on grid. so current moderate lag 'workable' 1500 man fleet fights could be extended to up to 3000 clients as the server would have a possible 50% more headroom. the x50 dialation would mean u could pack 75,000 into 1 fight. that is REDICULOUS! so anyone using that argument against time dialation should STFU, cause its an obvious troll for trolls sake. i hope ive answered some of your questions directly, the rest im sure are answered in the forum ive linked. and tbh if ur gonna argue your point seriously and genuinely then dont TLDR the original proposal. read it in full, cause if u dont then u shouldnt be posting there anyway. CSM Prop 1 CSM Prop 2
Destination SkillQueue Are We There Yet	Posted - 2011.04.12 09:44:00 - [49] Originally by: Rellik B00n Originally by: Terianna Eri it actually seems like a really good solution. I would gladly accept a 3x increase in the cycle time of everything (and of course similar effects applied to velocity, align time, warp speed, etc) if it meant that we could actually issue commands and have them be received in the right order. There is so much opportunity for tactics in fleet warfare that are made unviable just because they are too complex to be carried out in high-lag situations. no offense to you personally but your quote covers things i need: one of the worst changes EVER was the double HP buff CCP applied to all ships a few years back. Gone (mostly) was the Gank-gtfo option as most fights doubled in length. See where this is going? Doubling the timers on everything is effectively another double hp buff. Double hp buff was **ing **e. Not a good idea. You seem to under the impression this is something that will be happening in every fight and not only when the alternative is the server taking a nosedive and the gameplay becoming unplayable. This won't affect your random gank squads operation in any way. It turns a situation where you couldn't play at all to one where things become playable again in a limited and more even way. Yes the HP buffer won't suffer while DPS and RR plummets, but these were already situations where your guns can take several minutes to cycle. It's not meant to be the perfect solution to lag or used in normal situations, but to make the best out of the bad situations, that can currently be almost totally unplayable, and turn them into something bearable.
Rellik B00n Lethal Death Squad	Posted - 2011.04.12 09:49:00 - [50] Originally by: Destination SkillQueue You seem to under the impression this is something that will be happening in every fight correct. I know nothing at all about the issue and simply dived in when i hit the stuff i quoted. If this was implemented in a fashion that would ONLY affect large fleet fights in null sec I would be right behind it. I have my doubts that something can be implemented in such a situational manner by the powers that be. . -IRON MIKE IS hi sec lolwarrior-
GeeShizzle MacCloud Caldari	Posted - 2011.04.12 10:17:00 - [51] you wouldnt believe what can be done with programming now a days! ccp can tell when a server is capping out in CPU, and amazingly enough you can use something that monitors CPU usage on the servers to trigger time dialation when the CPU load reaches like 98%. its crazy i know! but its very very possible ;) CSM Prop 1 CSM Prop 2
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.04.12 10:26:00 - [52] Originally by: Tu Ko I have nothing against 'Time Dilation' idea as far as a concept, but to be quite honest CCP's track record on making features work is very poor. I am also concerned with this mechanic being exploited by using cyno to pull a capital off field mid battle, get it repaired and back in to the same fight, in what to the people effected by time dilation a few cycles. Not to mention hotdropped capitals will in theory be fully loaded and able to issue commands by perspective more quickly. nobody said it didn't need work. to be quite honest what could happen here is that instead of being restricted to the system where battle is happening, you would make it something like up to 2-3 jumps away, where each system that is farther away will suffer less and less dilation. like 1 jump from battle it's 50%, 2 jumps 25%, and so on. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Glyken Touchon Independent Alchemists	Posted - 2011.04.12 10:45:00 - [53] Edited by: Glyken Touchon on 12/04/2011 10:47:40 IF it can be implemented without exploits... it will improve the experience in fights, as ships will actually respond to commands, rather than just sitting there with modules lagged out unable to do anything. idea for the neighbouring systems: fleet fight system at 12x dilation adjacent systems 6x adjacent systems 3x until a predetemined threshold is reached This could help mitigate the issues with reinforcements, and might help the node as well depending on system allocation. edit: I'm sure Grimpak's post wasn't there when I started to type this. oh well..
Mr Kidd	Posted - 2011.04.12 10:47:00 - [54] Bah, forget TD. There's too much of an issue with logistics: large corp stages more ships to enter TD area than smaller corp. Smaller corp dies as larger corp ships finally make it to the battle. I mean, it's a good idea to deal with lag on the surface but really, I don't see any way to get around the issue that larger corps/alliances are going to be able to bring more reinforcements to the fight over a given period of time which is now being artificially lengthened in the favor of the larger corp/alliance. It'll be the death of hit & run tactics favored by smaller out numbered attacking fleets further slanting the game in favor of blobbing. Stacking penalties....how does a fc or individual pilot quantify that so dynamically on the fly? Does he break out excel and start running the calcs for the amount of reinforcements he's expecting only to be surprised with more/less show up? Never going to work.
Rixiu The Inuits	Posted - 2011.04.12 10:47:00 - [55] I can't say I'm super exited about this. It validates blobbing and treats the symptoms rather than the cause. Also, I doubt this would not solve lag. One issue could be that people would still click like fools and send the same amount of commands to the server which could result in an "evil circle" (or whatever it's called) of sorts as more commands are sent to the server per "real (serverside)" second. Grab a bat, punch the blobbing where it hurts and then beat it some more. But since team gridlock is the only team working on eve atm fighting symptoms is all that'll happen I guess...
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.04.12 10:55:00 - [56] Originally by: Rixiu I can't say I'm super exited about this. It validates blobbing and treats the symptoms rather than the cause. Also, I doubt this would not solve lag. One issue could be that people would still click like fools and send the same amount of commands to the server which could result in an "evil circle" (or whatever it's called) of sorts as more commands are sent to the server per "real (serverside)" second. Grab a bat, punch the blobbing where it hurts and then beat it some more. But since team gridlock is the only team working on eve atm fighting symptoms is all that'll happen I guess... "fixing lag" is as much as a quagmire as fixing blobbing. artificial limitations only bring about exploiting, while other more "natural" limitations and mechanisms simply aren't enough. people blob because they want to fight, not because of blobbing itself. an FC can't go to the fleet and say "okay people, we can't let anymore in because we would be blobbing. X Y and Z groups can stay, the rest of you go home and log off." the very same issue happens with lag. game doesn't lag because people want to lag it. it lags because people join up till it lags. TD, as a stopgap measure to ensure a good flow on fleet battles is a good proposition. it doesn't solve lag, but it makes the game actually not missing any "hearbeats" and no breaks on gaming experience. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
The Old Chap	Posted - 2011.04.12 10:59:00 - [57] I look forward to watching projectile rounds traverse across my screen at five pixels per second. And maybe target cruise missiles as they leave their launchers at a mighty 1 pixel per second, allowng me to take them out with my autocannons.
Holy One	Posted - 2011.04.12 11:03:00 - [58] unbelievably stupid proposal. csm6 is full of win. BBQ makes me hungry for more...
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2011.04.12 11:08:00 - [59] Quote: * creating a potentially large number of relatively minor objectives that have to be accomplished more or less at the same time (but in different grids//systems) in typical fleet combat offense/defense situations Make sov activity based (those who actually live in a system get sov, with some other parameters like station ownership), and no more blobbing a couple of timers to win, and w00t, lag+forced to blob = solved at the same time. Multiple minor objectives in different systems would help against lag, but it would do nothing against forcing people to blob to gain/defend sov and the problem that defending the first system is nothing easier than defending the 100th system.
Prt Scr	Posted - 2011.04.12 11:16:00 - [60] While at fan fest a drunk dev was talking about lag due to blobs, he said, the blobs will always be bigger then the hardware and or software can handle, and it will only ever get worse with current game machanics, so they looking at changing the mechanics.1st ccp wants to naturaly resrict allance sizes, making in hard for an alliance to hold vast areas of null sec., 2nd they are developing tools to moniter the 'black loading screen of death'. Rather then arriving and dieing before your grid loads he sugested that you simply arrive 'elsewhere'. As space time is affcted by faster then light warps and there are unstable WH all over the shop, he suggested that once a 'critical mass' dictated by the lag at the fleet fight is reached, new arrivals get jumped into WH space.So in future fleets will be forming and the fc will ask whos got the scanning probes before he says warp
Valator Uel Caldari Mercenaries of Andosia Northern Coalition.	Posted - 2011.04.12 11:21:00 - [61] Originally by: Mr Kidd Bah, forget TD. There's too much of an issue with logistics: large corp stages more ships to enter TD area than smaller corp. Smaller corp dies as larger corp ships finally make it to the battle. I mean, it's a good idea to deal with lag on the surface but really, I don't see any way to get around the issue that larger corps/alliances are going to be able to bring more reinforcements to the fight over a given period of time which is now being artificially lengthened in the favor of the larger corp/alliance. It'll be the death of hit & run tactics favored by smaller out numbered attacking fleets further slanting the game in favor of blobbing. Which is why in my post I suggest TD to affect surrounding systems to a certain extent: Originally by: Valator Uel As for the reinforcements problem, Time Dilation (TD) could have a knock-on effect on directly adjacent systems. For instance, if the system where the fight is taking place has a 5min delay on everything then adjacent systems could have a 2min delay and their adjacent systems a 1min delay. Otherwise I see TD to be bias to larger forces. EVE is notorious for lagging even with small number of pilots and would make hit-'n-run almost impossible to do if reinforcements are not slowed down. Instead of taking 10min to do a quick drive-by shooting you end up in a TD of 30min. It gives reinforcements 20 extra minutes to get to your system or camp exit gates. However if they are delayed in the nth-adjacent systems they will arrive "on time" when the main fleet's TD "ends", which simulates what would have happened had there been no lag. Edit: TD also offers another problem: the "have I pressed the button?" problem. You need to have a visual timer on your modules to know when they will activate and on whom. Otherwise you end up pressing the same button again and again not being sure if it is properly queued, who the module is to be activated on and when it'll activate. ------------------ empty sig
Mr Kidd	Posted - 2011.04.12 11:21:00 - [62] Originally by: Prt Scr As space time is affcted by faster then light warps and there are unstable WH all over the shop, he suggested that once a 'critical mass' dictated by the lag at the fleet fight is reached, new arrivals get jumped into WH space.So in future fleets will be forming and the fc will ask whos got the scanning probes before he says warp Who was this drunk dev? He needs to be fired for one of two reasons: 1) for leaking details of a monumentally stupid idea or 2) for conceiving such a monumentally stupid idea. I mean, WTF?!?
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.04.12 11:22:00 - [63] Originally by: Prt Scr While at fan fest a drunk dev was talking about lag due to blobs, he said, the blobs will always be bigger then the hardware and or software can handle, and it will only ever get worse with current game machanics, so they looking at changing the mechanics.1st ccp wants to naturaly resrict allance sizes, making in hard for an alliance to hold vast areas of null sec. well yeah. what about coalitions? Instead having 5 HUUUGE alliances, you have 10 less HUUUGE alliances. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
The Old Chap	Posted - 2011.04.12 11:24:00 - [64] Originally by: Grimpak Originally by: Prt Scr While at fan fest a drunk dev was talking about lag due to blobs, he said, the blobs will always be bigger then the hardware and or software can handle, and it will only ever get worse with current game machanics, so they looking at changing the mechanics.1st ccp wants to naturaly resrict allance sizes, making in hard for an alliance to hold vast areas of null sec. well yeah. what about coalitions? Instead having 5 HUUUGE alliances, you have 10 less HUUUGE alliances. And what will there be to stop HUUUGE alliances alliancing?
Flibertygibbet	Posted - 2011.04.12 11:27:00 - [65] Originally by: Prt Scr While at fan fest a drunk dev was talking about lag due to blobs, he said, the blobs will always be bigger then the hardware and or software can handle, and it will only ever get worse with current game machanics, so they looking at changing the mechanics.1st ccp wants to naturaly resrict allance sizes, making in hard for an alliance to hold vast areas of null sec., 2nd they are developing tools to moniter the 'black loading screen of death'. Rather then arriving and dieing before your grid loads he sugested that you simply arrive 'elsewhere'. As space time is affcted by faster then light warps and there are unstable WH all over the shop, he suggested that once a 'critical mass' dictated by the lag at the fleet fight is reached, new arrivals get jumped into WH space.So in future fleets will be forming and the fc will ask whos got the scanning probes before he says warp Lol the first idea wont work because superlarge alliances will just split into however many smaller constituent alliances to make up the former numbers, with alliance leadership using alts to control them. This concept already sorta exists within the big powerblocs. Having people randomly drop off-grid into WH space is more interesting, haha.
Rixiu The Inuits	Posted - 2011.04.12 11:29:00 - [66] Originally by: Grimpak "fixing lag" is as much as a quagmire as fixing blobbing. artificial limitations only bring about exploiting, while other more "natural" limitations and mechanisms simply aren't enough. people blob because they want to fight, not because of blobbing itself. an FC can't go to the fleet and say "okay people, we can't let anymore in because we would be blobbing. X Y and Z groups can stay, the rest of you go home and log off." the very same issue happens with lag. game doesn't lag because people want to lag it. it lags because people join up till it lags. TD, as a stopgap measure to ensure a good flow on fleet battles is a good proposition. it doesn't solve lag, but it makes the game actually not missing any "hearbeats" and no breaks on gaming experience. People blob because it's easier than not to blob. [metaphor] In pre-modern times (before the 19th century) armies of men would go to a field and shoot each other until everyone died or fled (just like in eve). The size of the armies depended on how many could be mustered but more importantly on logistics (as in supplies of food and such). If it would have been possible to move an infinite amount of men to a field they would have done so. But then the field would quickly become to small (the size of the field is server performance) and they would find a bigger field until they would have the largest field they could find (server performance can't get any better) and so it is filled up to the point where the men can't move and even less be able to fight (this would be lag). [/metaphor] tl;dr they had no lag in the medieval because moving people across continents was impossible. Make force projection harder AND ask the question, why do thousands of players go to one system? Is it because the enemy brings thousands of players too? If so, would thousands still go if the enemy were unable to bring thousands?
Copine Callmeknau Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams The KWFL Republic	Posted - 2011.04.12 11:56:00 - [67] rofl, love the last few posts that can be tl;dr'd as 'wahhhh, my tiny piece of **** alliance doesn't have the manpower to compete with large alliances that have put effort into recruiting and diplo. CCP should make it so that 10man corps can defeat NC on their own' ...oh wait Stunning EVE Online Theme for PS3
Azhpol Gallente Casa Del Wombat	Posted - 2011.04.12 12:04:00 - [68] Originally by: Rixiu Make force projection harder AND ask the question, why do thousands of players go to one system? Is it because the enemy brings thousands of players too? If so, would thousands still go if the enemy were unable to bring thousands? only way to stop this is to remove both jump clone and bridges, and even then people would travel huge distances to fight. Some people LIKE very large fleet warfare, and will travel to do it. Look at PL, they travel all over looking for the fights, and you can be fairly sure they aren't using jump bridges. Force projection is an issue, but its one that is realistic in terms of space warfare(if you accept the reality of any form of FTL). Go play some space based 4X if you don't believe me. ----------------------------------------------- Market help thread, or troll magnet?
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2011.04.12 12:12:00 - [69] Quote: why do thousands of players go to one system? Because the only way to get sov or defend sov in eve is by piling as many people as possible in a system during a few timers. Has only little to do with force projection (although granted it is an issue) and more with stupid game mechanics.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2011.04.12 12:41:00 - [70] As I was saying, now, with emphasis added... Since CCP can't find a workable way to encourage splitting up FOR THE TIME BEING, even if some suggestions along the lines of trying to accomplish that were given (which were not without their separate share of problems though, granted), the next best thing is slow-motion fights. _ CCP LEADERSHIP MENTALITY NEEDS TO CHANGE FAST ! "New junky features sell, old polished content doesn't" ? KILL IT WITH FIRE.
Pod Amarr	Posted - 2011.04.12 12:54:00 - [71] Edited by: Pod Amarr on 12/04/2011 12:56:12 Actually there is a third option. It would fix all lag in the game but it is too much of a system rework. Basically the whole system needs to run on a virtual layer with pieces of the code monitoring the performance the grids and then dynamically pulling resources smoothly from areas that don't need them to area that needs them. Not going to go into details but dynamic resource allocation is nothing new and the reinforced node report before downtime is really funny. If you have proper system design you can assign the resources from the whole clusters onto on grid in seconds. But this is probably too much to ask from a company that can not make a forum. Basically the only limiting factor here is how quick is "AI" that allocates the resources based on the settings and the internet connection bottleneck. Pod
Irani Firecam Gallente Lords 0f Justice Fidelas Constans	Posted - 2011.04.12 12:57:00 - [72] Edited by: Irani Firecam on 12/04/2011 12:57:53 Originally by: Azhpol Originally by: Rixiu Make force projection harder AND ask the question, why do thousands of players go to one system? Is it because the enemy brings thousands of players too? If so, would thousands still go if the enemy were unable to bring thousands? only way to stop this is to remove both jump clone and bridges, and even then people would travel huge distances to fight. Some people LIKE very large fleet warfare, and will travel to do it. Look at PL, they travel all over looking for the fights, and you can be fairly sure they aren't using jump bridges. Force projection is an issue, but its one that is realistic in terms of space warfare(if you accept the reality of any form of FTL). Go play some space based 4X if you don't believe me. Removing Jump Bridges will just lead to a massive increase of Titans for their ability to bridge entire fleets around, just like what PL does. My Wallpaper
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2011.04.12 13:00:00 - [73] Originally by: Pod Amarr Actually there is a third option. It would fix all lag in the game but it is too much of a system rework. [snip] Well, yeah, they have been talking about Infiniband integration and similar for ages, but it was kinda' shelved because it was too much :effort:. _ CCP LEADERSHIP MENTALITY NEEDS TO CHANGE FAST ! "New junky features sell, old polished content doesn't" ? KILL IT WITH FIRE.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.04.12 13:22:00 - [74] Originally by: Akita T Originally by: Pod Amarr Actually there is a third option. It would fix all lag in the game but it is too much of a system rework. [snip] Well, yeah, they have been talking about Infiniband integration and similar for ages, but it was kinda' shelved because it was too much :effort:. well creating a system that can move processing threads seamlessly across several nodes is kinda daunting. even I with 0 technical knowledge besides the very basics, can say that that is quite hard, and them delaying said project for improving software seems a feasible way to, at the very least, improve the situation a bit for the time being. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Rixiu The Inuits	Posted - 2011.04.12 13:23:00 - [75] Edited by: Rixiu on 12/04/2011 13:22:57 Originally by: Irani Firecam Removing Jump Bridges will just lead to a massive increase of Titans for their ability to bridge entire fleets around, just like what PL does. Indeed it would. Personally I would not remove jump bridges, rather restrict them to alliance only. Anyway, I may have drifted a bit off topic but in my opinion game and sov warfare design is more interesting than hurf durf "fix lag so me and my 50 000 friends can be in one system!!RAGE!" durfidurf. Time Dilation could be cool although it should be more of a stopgap of sorts than a final solution to the lagmonster. (Love your avatar btw, but I'm sure you've heard it a lot by now though )
Janu Hull Caldari Terra Incognita Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2011.04.12 13:29:00 - [76] Not a bad idea, as long as they implement it with some kind of wicked bullet-time special effect, a la The Matrix. In the event of an emergency, my ego may be used as a floatation device.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.04.12 13:37:00 - [77] Originally by: Rixiu (Love your avatar btw, but I'm sure you've heard it a lot by now though ) tattoo ruins it a bit imho. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Prt Scr	Posted - 2011.04.12 13:49:00 - [78] Originally by: The Old Chap Originally by: Grimpak Originally by: Prt Scr While at fan fest a drunk dev was talking about lag due to blobs, he said, the blobs will always be bigger then the hardware and or software can handle, and it will only ever get worse with current game machanics, so they looking at changing the mechanics.1st ccp wants to naturaly resrict allance sizes, making in hard for an alliance to hold vast areas of null sec. well yeah. what about coalitions? Instead having 5 HUUUGE alliances, you have 10 less HUUUGE alliances. And what will there be to stop HUUUGE alliances alliancing? I believe CCP want coalitions rather then alliances as they are historicaly more fragile. This fragility will be increaced with the ability to charge transit fees through your controlled space. With an absence of jump gates this will make holding pipe systems an income source. Plus a new and intresting way to backstab your best buddys. He was talking about one system a corp and one constelation (or region ) per alliance, a reduction in hp for TCU,SBU, I HUB and possably POS, which would be refunded with a capital upgrade to a I HUB The return of capital systems will allow for the upgrade of your constelation....player owned gate guns
BackStreet Babe	Posted - 2011.04.12 13:59:00 - [79] its a great idea, but ccp will **** it up if/when they implement it.
FraNtik BIG Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.04.12 14:04:00 - [80] Can we call this 'Bullet time' from now on? Much cooler name. ---------------------------------- BIG's Bloodhound "You can warp, but you can't hide"Ö
Calathea Sata State War Academy	Posted - 2011.04.12 15:18:00 - [81] Here's an idea. Make every ship's destiny ball (the invisible balls of physics collision) bigger, so ships cannot blob without creating a distance between the ships. E.g. frigates will be 2km in radius, cruisers 5km, battleships 8km, titans 50km perhaps. A blob of frigates will therefore be ships 2km apart from eachother minimum. A blob of battleships 8km from eachother. A blob of titans 50km from eachother. The distance will always depend on the smaller ship so a frigate can be 2km from a battleship, a battleship can also go next to a frigate until 2km. (Smartbombs or bomber bombs will then need corresponding balancing, of cause.)(The distances here are only an example for illustration purposes, it can be smaller or bigger.) This way blobing will actually require more skills: how to distribute ships to ensure they can all get optimal ranges (ties well with formations too, think about "form into a concave arc so everyone is 30km from the target" for example); how to distribute several RRs over the entire blob to cover everyone; how frigates can fill into the void between bigger ships to do additional damage, etc etc. I think the potentials of this idea is brilliant. I think this is an elegant solution without breaking immersion, and will actually improve the fun and skills of gameplay. This is much better than Time Dilation in my opinion.
Calathea Sata State War Academy	Posted - 2011.04.12 15:22:00 - [82] Edited by: Calathea Sata on 12/04/2011 15:24:34 The RP explaination would be "ships collision in space is fatal to the structure thus gravity emitters are installed on each ship to avoid other ships or astroids coming into contact." EDIT: started a thread for this idea in Ideas and Features.
Copine Callmeknau Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams The KWFL Republic	Posted - 2011.04.12 16:23:00 - [83] Originally by: Calathea Sata Here's an idea. Make every ship's destiny ball (the invisible balls of physics collision) bigger, so ships cannot blob without creating a distance between the ships. E.g. frigates will be 2km in radius, cruisers 5km, battleships 8km, titans 50km perhaps. A blob of frigates will therefore be ships 2km apart from eachother minimum. A blob of battleships 8km from eachother. A blob of titans 50km from eachother. The distance will always depend on the smaller ship so a frigate can be 2km from a battleship, a battleship can also go next to a frigate until 2km. (Smartbombs or bomber bombs will then need corresponding balancing, of cause.)(The distances here are only an example for illustration purposes, it can be smaller or bigger.) This way blobing will actually require more skills: how to distribute ships to ensure they can all get optimal ranges (ties well with formations too, think about "form into a concave arc so everyone is 30km from the target" for example); how to distribute several RRs over the entire blob to cover everyone; how frigates can fill into the void between bigger ships to do additional damage, etc etc. I think the potentials of this idea is brilliant. I think this is an elegant solution without breaking immersion, and will actually improve the fun and skills of gameplay. This is much better than Time Dilation in my opinion. THis doesn't sound ridiculously exploitable at all ...oh wait Stunning EVE Online Theme for PS3
Calathea Sata State War Academy	Posted - 2011.04.12 16:42:00 - [84] Originally by: Copine Callmeknau THis doesn't sound ridiculously exploitable at all Why don't you explain Mister?
Valator Uel Caldari Mercenaries of Andosia Northern Coalition.	Posted - 2011.04.12 16:58:00 - [85] Edited by: Valator Uel on 12/04/2011 17:02:29 Originally by: Calathea Sata Originally by: Copine Callmeknau THis doesn't sound ridiculously exploitable at all Why don't you explain Mister? 1) Warp fleet/SC/Titan into the middle of enemy fleet 2) laugh at the chaos 3) ??? 4) Profit! Edit: Or heck, even warping a fleet to a gate will be chaotic. ------------------ empty sig
Calathea Sata State War Academy	Posted - 2011.04.12 17:38:00 - [86] Originally by: Valator Uel Edited by: Valator Uel on 12/04/2011 17:02:29 Originally by: Calathea Sata Originally by: Copine Callmeknau THis doesn't sound ridiculously exploitable at all Why don't you explain Mister? 1) Warp fleet/SC/Titan into the middle of enemy fleet 2) laugh at the chaos 3) ??? 4) Profit! Edit: Or heck, even warping a fleet to a gate will be chaotic. How is that different from the current mechanics?
GeeShizzle MacCloud Caldari	Posted - 2011.04.12 17:40:00 - [87] Edited by: GeeShizzle MacCloud on 12/04/2011 17:43:08 Edited by: GeeShizzle MacCloud on 12/04/2011 17:41:59 Originally by: Calathea Sata Here's an idea. Make every ship's destiny ball (the invisible balls of physics collision) bigger, so ships cannot blob without creating a distance between the ships. E.g. frigates will be 2km in radius, cruisers 5km, battleships 8km, titans 50km perhaps. lets not go into the fact that those sizes would mean every ship larger than frigates wouldnt be able to get close enough to gates to even jump. so yes we should all listen to your wise words on how to vastly improve the game. way to go to break hisec, low sec and null sec all in one foul swoop! you dumb f**k! nb - id also like to add this.... how about you stop embarrassing yourself and let the grown ups decide how the game should run as you obviously dont have the intellectual capacity to make these kinds of decisions. CSM Prop 1 CSM Prop 2
Calathea Sata State War Academy	Posted - 2011.04.12 17:42:00 - [88] Originally by: GeeShizzle MacCloud Originally by: Calathea Sata Here's an idea. Make every ship's destiny ball (the invisible balls of physics collision) bigger, so ships cannot blob without creating a distance between the ships. E.g. frigates will be 2km in radius, cruisers 5km, battleships 8km, titans 50km perhaps. lets not go into the fact that those sizes would mean every ship larger than frigates wouldnt be able to get close enough to gates to even jump. so yes we should all listen to your wise words on how to vastly improve the game. way to go to break hisec, low sec and null sec all in one foul swoop! you dumb f**k! 200m 500m 800m how does that sound
GeeShizzle MacCloud Caldari	Posted - 2011.04.12 17:44:00 - [89] Originally by: Calathea Sata Originally by: GeeShizzle MacCloud Originally by: Calathea Sata Here's an idea. Make every ship's destiny ball (the invisible balls of physics collision) bigger, so ships cannot blob without creating a distance between the ships. E.g. frigates will be 2km in radius, cruisers 5km, battleships 8km, titans 50km perhaps. lets not go into the fact that those sizes would mean every ship larger than frigates wouldnt be able to get close enough to gates to even jump. so yes we should all listen to your wise words on how to vastly improve the game. way to go to break hisec, low sec and null sec all in one foul swoop! you dumb f*k! 200m 500m 800m how does that sound so keep it pretty much exactly how it is then! shakes head in dismay* CSM Prop 1 CSM Prop 2
Calathea Sata State War Academy	Posted - 2011.04.12 17:45:00 - [90] Originally by: GeeShizzle MacCloud Originally by: Calathea Sata Originally by: GeeShizzle MacCloud Originally by: Calathea Sata Here's an idea. Make every ship's destiny ball (the invisible balls of physics collision) bigger, so ships cannot blob without creating a distance between the ships. E.g. frigates will be 2km in radius, cruisers 5km, battleships 8km, titans 50km perhaps. lets not go into the fact that those sizes would mean every ship larger than frigates wouldnt be able to get close enough to gates to even jump. so yes we should all listen to your wise words on how to vastly improve the game. way to go to break hisec, low sec and null sec all in one foul swoop! you dumb f*k! 200m 500m 800m how does that sound so keep it pretty much exactly how it is then! shakes head in dismay* 500m 2000m 4000m
GeeShizzle MacCloud Caldari	Posted - 2011.04.12 17:53:00 - [91] Originally by: Calathea Sata 500m 2000m 4000m obvious troll is obvious... + fail cause u broke eve yet again! CSM Prop 1 CSM Prop 2
Avon Caldari Versatech Co. RED.OverLord	Posted - 2011.04.12 19:19:00 - [92] As previously mentioned, blobbing is a problem because doing it is trivial. Remove all bridges (including titan bridges) Remove WTZ Make it impossible to make WTZ bookmarks. Much better than making lag a feature. Retro sig
Irani Firecam Gallente Lords 0f Justice Fidelas Constans	Posted - 2011.04.12 19:20:00 - [93] Best way to remove the ability for blobs to form is to place a hard limit on concurrent connections so that no more than 2 players can connect, that way, there is a 50% chance that they will not blue themselves and form a blob. My Wallpaper
Yuki Kulotsuki	Posted - 2011.04.12 19:21:00 - [94] Technical solutions to human problems rarely work correctly. -- Did you know there's an alliance who's name you're not allowed to say, or website you're not allowed to link?
Avon Caldari Versatech Co. RED.OverLord	Posted - 2011.04.12 19:23:00 - [95] Originally by: Yuki Kulotsuki Technical solutions to human problems rarely work correctly. True, but I'm not sure nerfing humans is going to appear in the next lot of patch notes. Retro sig
Windjammer Gallente	Posted - 2011.04.12 19:31:00 - [96] http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1422034 As far as I know this is the first suggestion of what is being called Time Dialation. It may answer some of your questions. Properly implemented, this will rock and is one of the very few ideas which is enjoying nearly unanimous support. -Windjammer
Yuki Kulotsuki	Posted - 2011.04.12 19:34:00 - [97] I'm just saiyan that a game design change would be better than any technical change. People will fight the technical changes and find work-arounds. The next step becomes "soft" rules that enforced via EULA and TOS which just causes all kinds of headaches. If the game itself changes to make blobs inefficient then players will change their behavior. Or fail horribly. -- Did you know there's an alliance who's name you're not allowed to say, or website you're not allowed to link?
Chaos Incarnate Faceless Logistics	Posted - 2011.04.12 19:47:00 - [98] Edited by: Chaos Incarnate on 12/04/2011 19:49:12 Originally by: Akita T Originally by: Pod Amarr Actually there is a third option. It would fix all lag in the game but it is too much of a system rework. [snip] Well, yeah, they have been talking about Infiniband integration and similar for ages, but it was kinda' shelved because it was too much :effort:. It's been shelved, but CCP Veritas posted that he wanted to do it eventually in the IAMA programmer thing Originally by: CCP Veritas My plan, which please understand, is just mine and may not come to pass since I'm just a programmer-guy: * Apply standard optimization techniques (algorithmic and language) until they stop coming easy. Been at this for about 4 months now, still truckin' and the wins are still huge compared to the effort needed to make them happen. * Plan out and execute a graceful degradation scheme so the server responds predictably and reasonably to being overloaded. No matter how well we do at optimization and multi-core scaling, the design of Eve allows players to just bring more ships, so this is needed. * We should be in a very good place by now, so we'd have the time to be able to undertake a big project like going multi-core that's more researchy in nature. link step one is what they've been doing till now step two is time dilation (hopefully the nearfuture(tm)) step three is stuff like infiniband/multicore combat engine stuff (hopefully the far future(tm)) _____________________ Look down. Back up. Where are you? You're on a forum, with the alt your alt could post like.

CCP Chronotis	Posted - 2011.04.12 20:06:00 - [99] Originally by: Yuki Kulotsuki I'm just saiyan that a game design change would be better than any technical change. People will fight the technical changes and find work-arounds. The next step becomes "soft" rules that enforced via EULA and TOS which just causes all kinds of headaches. If the game itself changes to make blobs inefficient then players will change their behavior. Or fail horribly. There is game design changes being looked at as well. Time dilation is just one of the projects approaching from a technical angle which due to the CSM publicity following from the fanfest roundtables has been singled out. Suckiness, whether fairly distributed or not won't substitute for good gameplay experience, but will aid in the larger fleet fights where they can reasonably anticipate lag due to it being ~1500 people duking it out, as others mention, it is by no means our "golden bullet". Tis' why gridlock got more members this year to expand its role from just code optimisation to feature and mechanic changes so we can have a hard look at all the components of eve combat and see what can be done to make it better overall. This means things like how we travel between systems, the speed and distance travelled at, the frequency of interaction events, the function of MWD and the likes. Everything is on the table in this regards to what can be done to both promote more manageable fights and handle larger fights better. Early days, but hope that answers the question, in short: time dilation isnt the only project on the drawingboard for us and we are looking at gameplay changes.

Mongo Edwards	Posted - 2011.04.12 20:08:00 - [100] How would time dilation work when leaving the dilated system(s)? If you are x minutes behind everyone else in EVE how do you "catch up" to the rest of the universe? If you leave the dilated system and your system time magically jumps to the proper time that seems to be very immersion breaking. How about eve voice will your responses be slowed down in accordance with the effect of time dilation when speaking to someone outside the dilated system? How would region wide trade work for example if I buy something in a dilated system and inside the bubble it is 1830 but outside is 1930 does that mean my cash sits in escrow for 60 minutes x dilation factor while I wait for the system to catch up? At what time does my order clear 1930? or whatever the "universe time" is when the dilation catches up? How about sell orders and the margin trading skill if I have an order that fills in time dilated space (say 1730 system time) but it is 1900 universe time and I just defaulted on a margin trade because my money (which would have covered escrow) was caught in a time dilation what happens then? Do I get my goods and don't default or do I still default and get all my money and then have to recreate my order. tbh it may be much more efficient to have developers working on reducing server load as opposed to dealing with the ramifications of this sort of mechanic
Yuki Kulotsuki	Posted - 2011.04.12 20:16:00 - [101] Never meant to imply it would be a golden bullet Chrono. I think TD is boss and will make ~epic fites~ more better. But somewhere along the line this turned into a blob war argument and I was pointing out that trying to stop it with tech is the wrong approach. Good to hear ya'll are working to nerf humans. More power to you. -- Did you know there's an alliance who's name you're not allowed to say, or website you're not allowed to link?
Khamal Jolstien Caldari Sick Tight Controlled Chaos	Posted - 2011.04.12 20:54:00 - [102] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Originally by: Yuki Kulotsuki I'm just saiyan that a game design change would be better than any technical change. People will fight the technical changes and find work-arounds. The next step becomes "soft" rules that enforced via EULA and TOS which just causes all kinds of headaches. If the game itself changes to make blobs inefficient then players will change their behavior. Or fail horribly. There is game design changes being looked at as well. Time dilation is just one of the projects approaching from a technical angle which due to the CSM publicity following from the fanfest roundtables has been singled out. Suckiness, whether fairly distributed or not won't substitute for good gameplay experience, but will aid in the larger fleet fights where they can reasonably anticipate lag due to it being ~1500 people duking it out, as others mention, it is by no means our "golden bullet". Tis' why gridlock got more members this year to expand its role from just code optimisation to feature and mechanic changes so we can have a hard look at all the components of eve combat and see what can be done to make it better overall. This means things like how we travel between systems, the speed and distance travelled at, the frequency of interaction events, the function of MWD and the likes. Everything is on the table in this regards to what can be done to both promote more manageable fights and handle larger fights better. Early days, but hope that answers the question, in short: time dilation isnt the only project on the drawingboard for us and we are looking at gameplay changes. I sincerely hope you're not looking at changing the actual mechanics of basic game play. The inclusion of "the function of MWD and the likes" in your comment is deeply troubling. Your colleagues have already proved they do not understand how a major portion of the game (0.0) works, we do not need more drastic changes of this kind. Work under the hood all you want, just avoid changing parts of the game we already know and love. Originally by: McKinlay When you get on the batphone and the only people left in the phone book are Aeternus and BLAST it might be time to hang up.
Dorian Wylde	Posted - 2011.04.12 21:02:00 - [103] Originally by: Mongo Edwards How would time dilation work when leaving the dilated system(s)? If you are x minutes behind everyone else in EVE how do you "catch up" to the rest of the universe? If you leave the dilated system and your system time magically jumps to the proper time that seems to be very immersion breaking. How about eve voice will your responses be slowed down in accordance with the effect of time dilation when speaking to someone outside the dilated system? How would region wide trade work for example if I buy something in a dilated system and inside the bubble it is 1830 but outside is 1930 does that mean my cash sits in escrow for 60 minutes x dilation factor while I wait for the system to catch up? At what time does my order clear 1930? or whatever the "universe time" is when the dilation catches up? How about sell orders and the margin trading skill if I have an order that fills in time dilated space (say 1730 system time) but it is 1900 universe time and I just defaulted on a margin trade because my money (which would have covered escrow) was caught in a time dilation what happens then? Do I get my goods and don't default or do I still default and get all my money and then have to recreate my order. tbh it may be much more efficient to have developers working on reducing server load as opposed to dealing with the ramifications of this sort of mechanic Again, as it says in the letter, time dilation only affects local things. It does not affect things like skill training. Not very hard to assume trade falls into the same category. In fact, it would be pretty stupid to assume it would work any other way. When you leave the system where dilation is taking place, you don't notice any changes. Dilation only affects your ship, and since all your modules shut off when you jump into a new system anyway, there will be zero effect from moving between time dilation areas.
Jacque Cruix	Posted - 2011.04.12 21:10:00 - [104] Nice to hear from a Dev the level that this is being taken to. It is a given that a small and very vocal part of the player base will dislike any changes that come about but sometimes drastic changes are needed. We will always have the doomsayers and etc as always but everything should be on the table in the fight against lag.
Karash Amerius Sutoka	Posted - 2011.04.12 22:22:00 - [105] Originally by: Calathea Sata Time Dilation will not work. Formalizing lag as a game mechanic, really? That is really, really the worst way possible of fixing the problem, the problem of "whoever brings the most wins thus making everyone blobing as big a blob as possible". It will not fix the problem, only easing the syndrome, simply because of people will always try to bring as many as possible into the fight and the system will always be stretched outside its limit. Formalizing lag (Time Dilation) can ony ease out that much of lag and people will just keep bringing in more and more people until the server cannot afford the workload again. Moreover, it simply sounds ridiculous and immersion breaking. Lag is a natural product of the current game design itself: the fantasy of unlimited numbers of ship fighting together vs the realistic capabilities of the internet and the servers. As long as bringing as many ships into the fight as possible means easier wins, people will do it. Time Dilation won't work. Instead CCP should think about the game design itself: is the concept of an unlimited amount of ships fighting realistic? Perhaps 1000 vs 1000 will not be too different than 2000 vs 2000 simply because the screen and overview cannot contain that much information? Perhaps it is not 1000 but 500? How should we discourage people going over 500, maybe we can create some mechanisms to eliminate the advantages of bringing in more than 500 ships? Etc etc, I am only illustrating an example. I am sure there are better ideas than this one; I am sure someone can think of many more better ideas. But Time Dilation is the worst solution possible. This is by far about the worst "serious poast" I have read on the forums in quite awhile. Lag will be part of any game that is not sharded to hell and back. The only "design issue" that Eve has is that it is on one server, that is a feature. It should not be changed. Also breaking news, nothing is perfect, and roses don't grow out of your self important ideas because you have a secret ambition to be a game designer. Let the pros do their work. There are places in this forum that require gadflys and naysayers...but lets just not all give up the ship because you deem it unworthy. ========================= Karash Amerius - Operative - Sutoka Fighting Broke - A Eve Online Blog =========================
Gnulpie Minmatar Miner Tech	Posted - 2011.04.12 22:52:00 - [106] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Early days, but hope that answers the question, in short: time dilation isnt the only project on the drawingboard for us and we are looking at gameplay changes. Good, because I really don't care if others have also wait for 20 minutes for a cycle when I have to wait 20 minutes. This is just idiotic and wasted time. Knowing that everyone else has to wait that long doesn't make it better, it actually makes it even WORSE. So this time dilatation better contains some spiffy secret sauce which speeds up things for everyone and doesn't make it equally BAD for everyone!
SupaKudoRio	Posted - 2011.04.12 23:03:00 - [107] Originally by: Yuki Kulotsuki reinforcements will not be subject to dilation until they arrive on the field. 00:00 Notify Traffic Control reports heavy dilation at your destination, it will take some time for the receiving gate to be readied for you. Jumping in: 2 minutes and 8 seconds. Adjust delay accordingly to the level of dilation. Ye'llo?
GeeShizzle MacCloud Caldari	Posted - 2011.04.12 23:06:00 - [108] Originally by: Gnulpie Originally by: CCP Chronotis Early days, but hope that answers the question, in short: time dilation isnt the only project on the drawingboard for us and we are looking at gameplay changes. Good, because I really don't care if others have also wait for 20 minutes for a cycle when I have to wait 20 minutes. This is just idiotic and wasted time. Knowing that everyone else has to wait that long doesn't make it better, it actually makes it even WORSE. So this time dilatation better contains some spiffy secret sauce which speeds up things for everyone and doesn't make it equally BAD for everyone! no it changes it so that in a fleet fight it doesnt take 2 minutes to do the same thing that it might take 45 minutes for sometone else to do! it restores fair game mechanics to really laggy large scale fleet pvp. but there will still be the strategic decision to jump a fleet in as it would still lag the fleet jumping in more than the fleet already on grid. but just not to the rediculous amount it does currently. CSM Prop 1 CSM Prop 2
Yuki Kulotsuki	Posted - 2011.04.12 23:28:00 - [109] Originally by: GeeShizzle MacCloud but there will still be the strategic decision to jump a fleet in as it would still lag the fleet jumping in more than the fleet already on grid. but just not to the rediculous amount it does currently. I don't see how that's fair gameplay. Ideally everyone should be lagged equally which is what TD should do. -- Did you know there's an alliance who's name you're not allowed to say, or website you're not allowed to link?
Aphoxema G Megalith PMC	Posted - 2011.04.13 00:20:00 - [110] Originally by: Mongo Edwards How would time dilation work when leaving the dilated system(s)? If you are x minutes behind everyone else in EVE how do you "catch up" to the rest of the universe? If you leave the dilated system and your system time magically jumps to the proper time that seems to be very immersion breaking. How about eve voice will your responses be slowed down in accordance with the effect of time dilation when speaking to someone outside the dilated system? "Time Dilation" is just a fun sciency way of saying "every action queued by players will be accomplished in a fair order at the cost of losing realtime invokation.". This only needs to effect things like module activity and people warping into and out of grid or anything else where the consequences would be dependent on chance. ------------------------------- The fox chases for her meal, but the rabbit runs for her life.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one 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.