EVE Search - Regarding Time Dialation

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Regarding Time Dialation - a critical problem

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 4 post(s)
Axemaster	Posted - 2011.04.13 21:19:00 - [1] Edited by: Axemaster on 13/04/2011 21:23:31 Myself and a lot of other people recently read the devblog about the proposed mechanic of "Time Dialation". In this mechanic, the rate of time would slow down on overloaded servers, allowing all the computations to be finished, as opposed to keeping real time and having everything get messed up (the way it is now). This is a great plan, but there is a critical flaw: POS and station sieges. The defender could pack huge numbers of people into a system, forcing time to slow to the point where it would become impossible for an attacker to destroy a POS or station before downtime. During downtime the shields would recharge significantly, potentially above the reinforcement level, and a tower could be re-stronted. In a worst case scenario, it would take many hours, or even days for a structure to be destroyed, taking an attacker completely out of their timezone and giving the defender big advantages. In addition, Time Dialation would further incentivize the use of supercapitals, particularly Titans. This is because support fleets could reach a trapped supercap much more easily, since the supercap would take longer to die. And the speed of subcapital ships would matter less, making them less useful in general. I bring these issues up because while I like the idea of Time Dialation, I can also see that there would be pitfalls associated with it. One fix I would recommend is that when downtime starts, the rate of time that passes in a system should be the same as the average rate in the last hour before DT started. That would reduce the effects of possible exploits of the POS shield recharging. EDIT: An example of an exploit using Time Dialation would be this - a bunch of defenders all undock in destroyers fitted with civilian guns, warp to a safespot, and start shooting each other with ungrouped guns in order to slow down time until reinforcements can arrive. It would be even more effective if they all launched drones.
Corina's Bodyguard	Posted - 2011.04.13 21:49:00 - [2] I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but what I got out of that was that time did not actually slow down, just the way the server/client updated/communicated, lowering the number of requests.
Copine Callmeknau Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams The KWFL Republic	Posted - 2011.04.13 21:55:00 - [3] OP makes a pretty good point. Surely they could just keep TD clicking over during DT though, so shields don't recharge excessively couldn't they? ...oh wait Stunning EVE Online Theme for PS3
Helixios Minmatar	Posted - 2011.04.13 22:19:00 - [4] And if they do that, the defender simply has far more time to rally forces to counter the attack, and scout for weak points. I'd say that balances itself. - Battle Dust Proposal
Axemaster	Posted - 2011.04.13 22:34:00 - [5] Originally by: Helixios And if they do that, the defender simply has far more time to rally forces to counter the attack, and scout for weak points. I'd say that balances itself. Pretty sure you missed the point. My whole argument says that the defender gets huge advantages in the new system. So no, it's not balanced at all. In fact, I'd say this feature encourages blobbing more than any other in the history of the game.
Copine Callmeknau Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams The KWFL Republic	Posted - 2011.04.13 22:40:00 - [6] Considering you have absolutely no idea how this will implemented with regards to incoming reinforcements from outside of the fight system, maybe you should stfu? ...oh wait Stunning EVE Online Theme for PS3
Axemaster	Posted - 2011.04.13 22:53:00 - [7] Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Considering you have absolutely no idea how this will implemented with regards to incoming reinforcements from outside of the fight system, maybe you should stfu? Not sure if this was directed at myself or Helixios. If it was directed at me, then this is my response: CCP designed the Sov system, with the 3 day long station sieges. And many other snafus. So I'm just bringing this issue into the public (and hopefully CCP's) consciousness. Even so, I fully expect this to arrive marked "Exploitable!". I really want Time Dialation to be implemented. But it needs to be done correctly.
Ada Tora	Posted - 2011.04.13 23:30:00 - [8] Originally by: Axemaster I really want Time Dialation to be implemented. But it needs to be done correctly. Any implementation by which game time moves faster in one region of space compared to another, and is controllable by player action, is 100% exploitable. It doesn't even take an ounce of creativity to come up with ways for this to happen. This mechanic only favours the large super-alliances and coalitions. If you're going to slow down time during large fleet battles, slow down time for everyone in the game to make it fair. Otherwise you're just asking for trouble. But please, don't take the word of players on this. Ignore us like usual and implement your new half-baked idea and then backpedal when it gets exploited. Just don't ban the people trying to bring it to your attention this time, eh?
Burnharder	Posted - 2011.04.13 23:39:00 - [9] I didn't realise that Eve had a time constraint. I mean I thought it already slowed down when the grid was heaving. But anyway it seems to me that all you have to do is multiply your equation for whatever by "t", where "t" is the time step, and everything would stay as it was. That is to say, for example, if your equation gave you 1000 * t dps with the current clock tick (t = 1) then in a time dilation situation you would be doing 1000 * t dps where t = whatever the dilation factor was. If it was 2 (half speed), your dps would be 2000 :p. (s being a second of server time, not a second on your watch).
Vincent Athena	Posted - 2011.04.13 23:59:00 - [10] Downtime is fairly short, I do not think POS shields can get all the way from 25% to 50% during a DT (needed to allow a new reinforcing cycle). Also, right now undocking a huge number of destroyers to lag the node will have a bigger delaying effect than time dilation, giving time for reinforcements to arrive. When lag hits it looks like the server gets into some sort of self-defeating loop, trying to do tasks over and over, never finishing, always re-starting, beating itself to death. The issue the OP brings up is valid, but we already have it. TD may in fact make huge battles run faster by allowing the sever to finish tasks, rather than restarting half finished tasks over and over each clock tick.

Captain Brickwalle	Posted - 2011.04.14 03:39:00 - [11] OMG new mechanic makes blobs not insta-pwn structures with millions and millions of hitpoints! also they said it was based on server strain not on number of players.... since the server can currently handle thousands of people with minimal lag, this dilation surely would only kick in when 3000+ people are engaged.
Your Client	Posted - 2011.04.14 03:52:00 - [12] Edited by: Your Client on 14/04/2011 03:55:27 Im pretty sure time dilation only refers to pvp related actions. Quote: In a dilated system, your guns might fire at half their normal speed, but you would be 100% certain that your guns fired and shot who you were aiming at. Meanwhile, your out-of-battle functions such as skills would continue at a normal rate. Hopefully, a pos/station timer would be considered "out-of-battle" even when its being attacked or is firing on someone. EDIT: If Blobs = time dilation, then station sieges might take 3 weeks
Astroka	Posted - 2011.04.14 04:04:00 - [13] Edited by: Astroka on 14/04/2011 04:05:43 I've read about and discussed the original proposal in assembly hall, and this is the way they want to do it? I'm all for helping out with lag, but seriously, making any one area of space operate slower than the rest is absolute bull. NOT the way to go about it, IMO. But, sometimes extreme circumstances cause for extreme measures. ====================================== "Rawr" means "I love you" in dinosaur! ======================================
Apollo Gabriel Brotherhood Of Fallen Angels Etherium Cartel	Posted - 2011.04.14 04:41:00 - [14] THere has been conversations about CYNOS and spool up times, which could be made to "dilate" as well. Jump gate traffic could be slowed down and you could spread out the effect from the system to make the effect more continuous and less discrete. *** Signature may appear without warning! *** Please do not feed the trolls, it builds dependency.
Di Mulle	Posted - 2011.04.14 04:49:00 - [15] Originally by: Astroka Edited by: Astroka on 14/04/2011 04:05:43 I'm all for helping out with lag, but seriously, making any one area of space operate slower than the rest is absolute bull. NOT the way to go about it, IMO. Generally speaking, time dilation already exists, we like it or not. Just its' effects may be quite random and different for people in the same system. By making it "official", hopefully, it will be more "fair".
Rens Cheque	Posted - 2011.04.14 04:50:00 - [16] Originally by: Axemaster Edited by: Axemaster on 13/04/2011 21:23:31 The defender could pack huge numbers of people into a system, forcing time to slow to the point where it would become impossible for an attacker to destroy a POS or station before downtime. Hmm, I haven't participated in any of the 0.0 blobfests myself, but couldn't a defender do the same thing with the current system and just lag the node to hell and back to save a POS anyway?
Patient 2428190 DEGRREE'Fo'FREE Internet Business School	Posted - 2011.04.14 05:05:00 - [17] You do realize that they could make all SBU/TCU/Station/logoff timers the same RL length no matter how much they change the speed of the system clock, right? Right? ...Then when you stopped to think about it. All you really said was Lalala.
Jada Maroo	Posted - 2011.04.14 05:05:00 - [18] Surely everything in the system will have to be slowmo'd right? Even shield recharge rates. If not, then shield users are going to have a MASSIVE advantage.
El'Niaga Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2011.04.14 05:10:00 - [19] Some good points and an excellent scenario. Now's the time to bring up such things, though sadly CCP ignores folks when they poke holes in their plans.... I'm all for the defender having an advantage though. Nothing wrong with that but this could perhaps tip the scales a bit to much.
Sekket Caldari White-Noise	Posted - 2011.04.14 06:44:00 - [20] The idea of the time dilation is that everything goes bullet time but nobody gets to be Neo, or even Trinity. The speed of the simulation slows down for the affected systems, so the clock ticks that cycle your guns, move your ships, recharge your capacitor and shields and pulse your modules all happen slower so the servers have the time to run all the calculations and apply the results for everyone in the system during the same tick. The OP does have a good point about defenders exploiting such a system by trying to stretch the combat out to downtime in order to get the POS shield recharge, but that can be taken care of with a rule change.

SmashTech	Posted - 2011.04.14 06:54:00 - [21] Originally by: Axemaster I'd say this feature encourages blobbing more than any other in the history of the game. Spoiler Alert ----------------- This feature is designed to enable fairer (lag-wise) large-scale fleet warfare. I bolded the important part for you.
Destination SkillQueue Are We There Yet	Posted - 2011.04.14 07:11:00 - [22] Metagaming in my my EVE !??!! Some of you act like these kind of things aren't possible or done already. If you can force the system to time dilation in the future you can force it to be unplayable now with even less effort, ensuring there will be no fighting. A stressed server doesn't work properly now, so even if it doesn't crash the affects to actual combat is worse than it would be in a time dilated system. The only difference is that with time dilation you would need a much larger amount of people to bring the server to that state, so if anything time dilation would improve the attackers chance to destroy the targets in time. In the worst case scenario you will have to make some adjustments to few game mechanics to minimize the effects of metagaming. Either way minimal, already exiting issues for huge gains. A tradeoff I'd happily make in an instant.

CCP Veritas	Posted - 2011.04.14 09:40:00 - [23] Originally by: Axemaster Fantastic post These are all fine points that we'll absolutely have to keep in mind while this gets done. In general though, I fall back on the reality that a heavily overloaded system today drops DPS down very far already due to unresponsiveness. All time dilation really changes is that it makes that mechanism planned and predictable. In other words, a defender who wanted to stall the fight to wait for more reinforcement, and happened to have a few hundred people on hand to make that happen, can already do so today. The cyno question is one we're going to have to ponder a bit, that's a situation where events in one system have meaning in others, which makes the decision on whether to dilate them or not non-trivial.

Burnharder	Posted - 2011.04.14 09:46:00 - [24] Originally by: Axemaster Originally by: Helixios And if they do that, the defender simply has far more time to rally forces to counter the attack, and scout for weak points. I'd say that balances itself. Pretty sure you missed the point. My whole argument says that the defender gets huge advantages in the new system. So no, it's not balanced at all. In fact, I'd say this feature encourages blobbing more than any other in the history of the game. I still don't understand how this would work. As I explained above, if instead of the server time constraint = 1 second, you change it to 2 seconds, you simply multiply your equation by t = 2 - everything still happens at the same rate, it's just that you "miss" the state at t = 1. You've still applied t * DPS, you've still tanked t * DPS, you've still moved t * distance, etc. It's just like running a movie at 30 fps instead of 60 fps, but skipping every other frame.
Major Failsauce Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2011.04.14 10:03:00 - [25] Edited by: Major Failsauce on 14/04/2011 10:03:29 Time Dialation is an incentive to create even bigger blops where everyone and the kitchen sink will have to be thrown in to defend. This solution will buy CPP some time to fix lag properly. Eventually the blop will catch up and RL time will be the determining factor.
Your Client	Posted - 2011.04.14 10:16:00 - [26] Time dilation should be spread to skill training! If you are allegiant to your alliance, you will take the hit! Stop being a wuss and make sacrifices for your alliance!
chaosyourgod Minmatar Virtual Warriors IMPERIAL LEGI0N	Posted - 2011.04.14 10:18:00 - [27] Originally by: Axemaster Myself and a lot of other people recently read the devblog about the proposed mechanic of "Time Dialation". In this mechanic, the rate of time would slow down on overloaded servers, allowing all the computations to be finished, as opposed to keeping real time and having everything get messed up (the way it is now). quote] eve online needs bullet time thats what i read from that and i agree with it completely, ccp make it so the truth is but a lie
Doctor Ungabungas Caldari GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2011.04.14 11:18:00 - [28] Originally by: Your Client Time dilation should be spread to skill training! If you are allegiant to your alliance, you will take the hit! Stop being a wuss and make sacrifices for your alliance! People more worried about skill training than ~good fights~ are playing the wrong game.
Montgomery Crabapple	Posted - 2011.04.14 11:56:00 - [29] Originally by: Doctor Ungabungas Originally by: Your Client Time dilation should be spread to skill training! If you are allegiant to your alliance, you will take the hit! Stop being a wuss and make sacrifices for your alliance! People more worried about skill training than ~good fights~ are playing the wrong game. I care more about skill training than I do about good fights, so **** off.
Ada Tora	Posted - 2011.04.14 12:09:00 - [30] Originally by: CCP Veritas In other words, a defender who wanted to stall the fight to wait for more reinforcement, and happened to have a few hundred people on hand to make that happen, can already do so today. Shouldn't this be considered a deliberate attempt to abuse broken game mechanics to skew results in your favour? Use the example already given about launching a couple hundred destroyers with noob guns, all shooting at each other. The only reason for that is to consume CPU time. There are potentially many other ways to do this, some easier to spot than others. Shouldn't that warrant at least a temporary ban instead of using technology to fix an administrative problem (which it will fail to do)?

Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2011.04.14 12:56:00 - [31] Edited by: Akita T on 14/04/2011 13:00:21 The real question is... why even dilate time at all ? All that's REALLY needed is a reduction in server tick frequency. You already have stuff that does not take an integer number of seconds to accomplish, and I HOPE we can assume that if you have, say, a 5.98 seconds RoF that's noticeably worse than 5.51 seconds RoF for DPS purposes, for instance. Yes, the system will become slightly less responsive, but that sidesteps A LOT of the problems which would be associated with actually altering the flow of time. You know, things like how do you deal with reinforcement timers, the fact that you make it easier for reinforcements to arrive, how do you handle cynos which have an effect outside the solar system and so on and so forth. Simply altering the sampling size from the current 1 second to X seconds SHOULD be enough, and also easier to code (wherever you have any calculation that involves time, instead of using "1 second", use "X seconds" instead). Heck, that could go the other way around too. You could set "X" at 0.5, for instance, for nodes with very light loads, and people would get a much more responsive system. _ CCP LEADERSHIP MENTALITY NEEDS TO CHANGE FAST ! "New junky features sell, old polished content doesn't" ? KILL IT WITH FIRE.

CCP Veritas	Posted - 2011.04.14 13:12:00 - [32] Originally by: Akita T The real question is... why even dilate time at all ? All that's REALLY needed is a reduction in server tick frequency. I can say with a reasonable amount of authority that this is far less than what is really needed. A large portion of load (namely, anything to do with modules) does not operate on Destiny's tick. Using any specific system as the safety valve for the server is just begging for unfairness between systems - like being able to shoot guns but not being able to warp out, or visa-versa. Trying to balance them all so they degrade themselves in their own way at rates that everyone is happy with is, imo, an impossible task.

Valator Uel Caldari Mercenaries of Andosia Northern Coalition.	Posted - 2011.04.14 13:21:00 - [33] Will we have visual confirmations of how much of a factor time slowed down? Will time dilation be dynamic or come in "steps", as in suddenly go from 0.9x to 0.1x normal time? Draw straws and get the loser to write a detailed (non-committing) devblog 'cause this is very interesting. ------------------ empty sig
Malcanis Caldari Alcohlics Anonymous	Posted - 2011.04.14 13:24:00 - [34] Edited by: Malcanis on 14/04/2011 13:25:20 Originally by: Major Failsauce Edited by: Major Failsauce on 14/04/2011 10:03:29 Time Dialation is an incentive to create even bigger blops where everyone and the kitchen sink will have to be thrown in to defend. This solution will buy CPP some time to fix lag properly. Eventually the blop will catch up and RL time will be the determining factor. At the end of the day it's up to us to decide how we play and to CCP to do they best they can to cater to that. We're the ones who decide to bring 1000 guys. CCP dont make us do it. What you seem to be saying in essence is "CCP should not improve big fleet fight performance because that just encourages big fleet fights. Dont fix the game so that it works for playstyles I dont approve of!" On a side note, some people in this thread dont seem to get that TD is nothing more than managed, regulated, evenly-applied lag with (hopefully) fewer/none of those excitingly unpredictable weird side-effects we all know and love. There is no "exploit" that can apply to TD that doesn't already apply to current high lag situations - and quite a few lagsploits that wouldn't work with TD. Conceptually, TD is just "graceful" lag, with the "benefits" and penalties fairly applied to everybody, rather than unfairly advantaging whichever side manages to pack out the node first. Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2011.04.14 13:26:00 - [35] Edited by: Akita T on 14/04/2011 13:26:34 Originally by: CCP Veritas A large portion of load (namely, anything to do with modules) does not operate on Destiny's tick. Too bad _ CCP LEADERSHIP MENTALITY NEEDS TO CHANGE FAST ! "New junky features sell, old polished content doesn't" ? KILL IT WITH FIRE.
Abdiel Kavash Caldari Paladin Order Fidelas Constans	Posted - 2011.04.14 13:54:00 - [36] Another problem I see is with reinforcement timers. Either time dilation slows them down too (i.e. the seconds will tick less often than once per second), or it leaves them unafected. Either way has a possibility for exploiting: If the dilation slows down the timers, it is possible for the defenders to amass a thousand of noobships in a system with the timer, slow the timer down, and thus move it into their prefered timezone, or to just about any time they want. The attacker can only very roughly predict when will the timer end, and even that only if they have a scout watching the reinforced structure at all times. If, on the other hand, dilation doesn't affect the timers, this makes them from the POV of people in system tick faster. For example, with POSes, the attacker is exposed to less rounds of POSgun fire before they can attack the POS. I know that most fights start only after the timers end, but nevertheless, this gives both fleets less "effective seconds" to work with before the timer ends. --- Originally by: Sporked EVE IS DYING RUN TO THE HILLS! WE MIGHT HAVE TO ENGAGE WITH OTHER PEOPLE IN THIS MMO! THEY MIGHT SHOOT AT US WHILE WE ARE BUSY HOLDING HANDS AND FROLICKING! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Zanes Shoubje	Posted - 2011.04.14 14:06:00 - [37] Doesnt Time Dilation have something to do with distances being altered. How about when time is dilated due to heavy load on the system why not change hit point "distances" so stuff dies, relatively(pun intended) speaking, at a different rate then normal. For instance hitpoints are reduced to the same extend as time is dilated, perhaps only of structures. Making it that even though everything is slowed down your pos dies just as quick. You could make a non linear relation where at some point of dilation stuff dies quicker and at others slower than normal. This is probably a ***** to program but could make blobbing a more calculated strategy where bringing more does not mean better. Come to think of it just now some of this is already available in Incursion and W-space systems.
Ay Liz Sacred Templars RED.OverLord	Posted - 2011.04.14 14:15:00 - [38] Edited by: Ay Liz on 14/04/2011 14:15:50 Edited by: Ay Liz on 14/04/2011 14:15:20 Originally by: Zanes Shoubje Doesnt Time Dilation have something to do with distances being altered. How about when time is dilated due to heavy load on the system why not change hit point "distances" so stuff dies, relatively(pun intended) speaking, at a different rate then normal. For instance hitpoints are reduced to the same extend as time is dilated, perhaps only of structures. Making it that even though everything is slowed down your pos dies just as quick. You could make a non linear relation where at some point of dilation stuff dies quicker and at others slower than normal. This is probably a ***** to program but could make blobbing a more calculated strategy where bringing more does not mean better. Come to think of it just now some of this is already available in Incursion and W-space systems. This does make sense but would not be properly balanced. If the system got dilated enough it could become possible to alpha said structure with high-alpha ships like Maelstroms. Then it is a matter of how many Maelstroms you bring and how much you can dilate the system with noobchars to alpha a station. But i guess that will become a problem anyways. Imagine 1000 Maelstroms in a dilated system where guns fire for everyone. God save us all.
quigibow	Posted - 2011.04.14 14:46:00 - [39] i dont get it they are going to slow down time? so what ccp is going to blow pot smoke into the servers?
Calathea Sata State War Academy	Posted - 2011.04.14 14:56:00 - [40] Originally by: CCP Veritas In general though, I fall back on the reality that a heavily overloaded system today drops DPS down very far already due to unresponsiveness. All time dilation really changes is that it makes that mechanism planned and predictable. In other words, a defender who wanted to stall the fight to wait for more reinforcement, and happened to have a few hundred people on hand to make that happen, can already do so today. "We cannot fix the lag, what do?" "Let's legalize it into a game mechanism so players can actually make use of it, to lag the enemy out!" "Good idea!" WTF CCP

Carmine Terriv Caldari Eve Defence Force DEM0N HUNTERS	Posted - 2011.04.14 14:59:00 - [41] Gentlemen. The real solution is to buy more hamsters. MORE I SAY. ------------------------------------------- Simple Steps to Complex Problems

CCP Veritas	Posted - 2011.04.14 15:07:00 - [42] Originally by: Calathea Sata "We cannot fix the lag, what do?" "Let's legalize it into a game mechanism so players can actually make use of it, to lag the enemy out!" "Good idea!" WTF CCP "Computers have finite computing power, what do?" "Let's throttle load to fit the computing power we've got!" "Good idea!" FTFY

Calathea Sata State War Academy	Posted - 2011.04.14 15:31:00 - [43] Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: Calathea Sata "We cannot fix the lag, what do?" "Let's legalize it into a game mechanism so players can actually make use of it, to lag the enemy out!" "Good idea!" WTF CCP "Computers have finite computing power, what do?" "Let's throttle load to fit the computing power we've got!" "Good idea!" FTFY OMG, seriously? So lagging the enemy out is now an "intended game mechanic", seriously? No, wait, seriously, that isn't a joke?
Daesis Wrack The Kairos Syndicate Transmission Lost	Posted - 2011.04.14 15:53:00 - [44] Edited by: Daesis Wrack on 14/04/2011 15:53:36 Edited by: Daesis Wrack on 14/04/2011 15:53:03 Originally by: CCP Veritas "Computers have finite computing power, what do?" "Let's throttle load to fit the computing power we've got!" "Good idea!" FTFY That's not fully thought-through. Slowing down the battle gives the defenders more time to get more people in position, slowing down the battle even more. It also gives logistics more time to communicate and react to a target-switch, making killing anything even harder. Soon enough, downtime comes. Think up a system that makes the battle go faster, removing players from the system (and therefore lightening, rather than increasing, the server load), rather than slower. If you want fleet fights to actually be winnable (by either side), you have to make ships die.
Steve Thomas Minmatar Sebiestor Tribe	Posted - 2011.04.14 16:30:00 - [45] well the other alternative is to physicaly limmit the number of ships that can be in system.... oh wait, just jump 1000 afl cloaked alts into a system to keep it permasafe.... that and frankly CCP has been trying to slow down fights for years so they can impliment system targeting(every time its brought up its in the top 5 (or 3 depending on the Developer) percent of things they WANT to impliment) .End of line. If your too paranoid to play EvE. . . ...then your not paranoid enough to play EvE ----------------
Karash Amerius Sutoka	Posted - 2011.04.14 16:45:00 - [46] Oh gee, that is too bad. I guess we will have to remove / rework POS mechanics. I am sure everyone who has ever laid siege on a POS is crying in their milk right now. I mean, that is the most elite form of combat in Eve right? [/sarcasm] ========================= Karash Amerius - Operative - Sutoka Fighting Broke - A Eve Online Blog =========================
Ranger 1 Amarr Paragon Fury Cascade Imminent	Posted - 2011.04.14 16:54:00 - [47] Edited by: Ranger 1 on 14/04/2011 16:57:09 Originally by: Calathea Sata Originally by: CCP Veritas Originally by: Calathea Sata "We cannot fix the lag, what do?" "Let's legalize it into a game mechanism so players can actually make use of it, to lag the enemy out!" "Good idea!" WTF CCP "Computers have finite computing power, what do?" "Let's throttle load to fit the computing power we've got!" "Good idea!" FTFY OMG, seriously? So lagging the enemy out is now an "intended game mechanic", seriously? No, wait, seriously, that isn't a joke? Time dilation would apply equally to all parties in system, not just the enemy. This is not what happens currently. Re-read the information available, understand it, then come back and we'll all discuss it. And yes, it turns "lag" from a vulnerability into a "feature", one that would scale to allow virtually any size battle as long as you are willing to take longer for your actions to be reflected on screen (in a predictable and controlled fashion). Brilliant. ===== The world will not end in 2012, however there will be a serious nerf to Planetary Interaction.
Vincent Athena	Posted - 2011.04.14 16:55:00 - [48] Edited by: Vincent Athena on 14/04/2011 16:56:01 CCP Veritas, what would be subject to TD? One grid? One solar system? One node? What about POS stront use? Would it see TD? Would missiles actually be animated as flying slower? Would explosions expand slower? Would the swirly effect of a remote repper beam swirl slower? To everyone else: Questions such as these show why implementing TD will be difficult. Also any idea on how TD will grow with fight size? Like if 1000 ships just tops out a server, what would be needed to handle 2000? x2.5 or so, or what? Note: In special relativity, time in the static frame is T, in the moving frame is Tau. The ratio is called Gamma, and increases from 1.0 as the moving frame goes faster. When a fleet fight starts getting big, new people wanting to join will be asking "Whats Gamma up to?" Edit: typo
Ranger 1 Amarr Paragon Fury Cascade Imminent	Posted - 2011.04.14 17:03:00 - [49] Edited by: Ranger 1 on 14/04/2011 17:03:15 Originally by: Daesis Wrack Edited by: Daesis Wrack on 14/04/2011 15:53:36 Edited by: Daesis Wrack on 14/04/2011 15:53:03 Originally by: CCP Veritas "Computers have finite computing power, what do?" "Let's throttle load to fit the computing power we've got!" "Good idea!" FTFY That's not fully thought-through. Slowing down the battle gives the defenders more time to get more people in position, slowing down the battle even more. It also gives logistics more time to communicate and react to a target-switch, making killing anything even harder. Soon enough, downtime comes. Think up a system that makes the battle go faster, removing players from the system (and therefore lightening, rather than increasing, the server load), rather than slower. If you want fleet fights to actually be winnable (by either side), you have to make ships die. ===== The world will not end in 2012, however there will be a serious nerf to Planetary Interaction.

CCP Zymurgist Gallente C C P	Posted - 2011.04.14 17:03:00 - [50] Moved from General Discussion. Zymurgist Community Representative CCP NA, EVE Online Contact Us


Khorkrak Gallente Solacarium	Posted - 2011.04.14 17:04:00 - [51] Axemaster, your arguments would be more convincing if you didn't appear to be trying so hard to sound intelligent. Here are some of the mistakes in your post that make you sound like a tool. "Myself and a lot of other people recently read the devblog" This sentence should begin with the word I not Myself. This is a rather comical and common blunder made when the writer is trying to sound professional or knowledgeable. It's easy to spot, so here's how to avoid this mistake: "Myself recently read the devblog" Does that not sound idiotic? A similar mistake occurs with I when that's used instead of me. "In a worst case scenario" So there is more than one worst case scenario presumably? That makes no sense. "And the speed of subcapital ships would matter less, making them less useful in general." Starting a sentence with And is poor grammar while using the same adjective twice is bad style. "The importance of the speed advantage that sub-capital ships have now would be diminished."
Ranger 1 Amarr Paragon Fury Cascade Imminent	Posted - 2011.04.14 17:13:00 - [52] Originally by: Khorkrak Axemaster, your arguments would be more convincing if you didn't appear to be trying so hard to sound intelligent. Here are some of the mistakes in your post that make you sound like a tool. "Myself and a lot of other people recently read the devblog" This sentence should begin with the word I not Myself. This is a rather comical and common blunder made when the writer is trying to sound professional or knowledgeable. It's easy to spot, so here's how to avoid this mistake: "Myself recently read the devblog" Does that not sound idiotic? A similar mistake occurs with I when that's used instead of me. "In a worst case scenario" So there is more than one worst case scenario presumably? That makes no sense. "And the speed of subcapital ships would matter less, making them less useful in general." Starting a sentence with And is poor grammar while using the same adjective twice is bad style. "The importance of the speed advantage that sub-capital ships have now would be diminished." Could you shut up and not derail the thread please. Nobody cares about his grammar. ===== The world will not end in 2012, however there will be a serious nerf to Planetary Interaction.
Terianna Eri Senex Legio Get Off My Lawn	Posted - 2011.04.14 17:42:00 - [53] Originally by: Daesis Wrack That's not fully thought-through. Slowing down the battle gives the defenders more time to get more people in position, slowing down the battle even more. It also gives logistics more time to communicate and react to a target-switch, making killing anything even harder. Soon enough, downtime comes. Wow, you mean the game might be playable enough in large battles so that logistics can actually do their fcking job and rep ships and we might get large-scale tactics beyond "HURR X IS PRIMARY I HOPE WE LAG LESS THAN THEY DO"?, since previously (currently?) you can't rely on any strategy more complicated than that actually functioning in high-lag situations? How awful. ________________ Originally by: CCP Incognito PS the "time to P*nis" is the shortest time recorded in human history. :)
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts	Posted - 2011.04.14 18:00:00 - [54] Originally by: Daesis Wrack That's not fully thought-through. Slowing down the battle gives the defenders more time to get more people in position, slowing down the battle even more. It also gives logistics more time to communicate and react to a target-switch, making killing anything even harder. Soon enough, downtime comes. You appear to have missed the part where giant battles go already go incredibly slowly because people's ships don't respond to commands, guns don't fire and people just stare at blackscreens or empty grids. It's very likely that time dilation will increase the kill rate because people will actually have control of their ships and be able to fire their guns. The logistics issue is almost certainly nonsense because sufficient well-coordinated alpha will just blast straight through it.
Xorth Adimus Caldari Blackwater USA Inc. Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2011.04.14 21:22:00 - [55] Time dilation, a fix to a problem that should not exist in a massive universe with thousands of empty star systems in it. The problem is sov mechanics promote 'da blob'. They promote everyone living in a small area and fighting over sov one system at a time. The fix is a properly design sov mechanics so they work in a incremental way over multiple starsystems. Go here in a large fleet and shoot this. Go here in a large fleet and defend this. Its always going to scale in the worst way which is why when the unimaginative 'sov structures' were introduced with PI some kind of ' hello kitty-online farm'. Not a sov system that worked and encouraged small scale activity and management, I could see this coming a mile off. People may still blob up for killing high end POSs killing each other / cap fights but at least it isn't directly promoted by game mechanics. If you fix congestion with more roads the population use more cars, stop trying to fix a symptom of a broken game mechanic.
RedClaws Amarr Black Serpent Technologies R.A.G.E	Posted - 2011.04.15 08:50:00 - [56] Half of the people discussing this don't have a clue what is actually meant by CCP or have never participated in large scale combat. More time for reinforcements to arrive? Hah! Fights take long enough already with 10 minutes to fire a single volley. It's just changing lag from "random commands that happen to make it through to the server" to "making sure every command will be processed". I'd be more than happy to slow the game down a bit more if I could actually target stuff reliably.
Khorkrak Gallente Solacarium	Posted - 2011.04.15 15:27:00 - [57] Here's a solution: Stop using threading and C++ for this part of the system. Instead use a declarative, functional language like Erlang or Haskell that's proven to scale far better for this type of problem while requiring 10 - 20% of the code to accomplish the task. Erlang compared to C++ Stop using Microsoft Windows Server and instead switch to something reasonable such as CentOS (Linux) or FreeBSD or Sun OS.
Zahira Wrath Amarr Dominion Strategic	Posted - 2011.04.15 17:06:00 - [58] Originally by: Khorkrak Here's a solution: Stop using threading and C++ for this part of the system. Instead use a declarative, functional language like Erlang or Haskell that's proven to scale far better for this type of problem while requiring 10 - 20% of the code to accomplish the task. Erlang compared to C++ Stop using Microsoft Windows Server and instead switch to something reasonable such as CentOS (Linux) or FreeBSD or Sun OS. Oh give me a break. You gonna tell them to use MySQL too?
Khorkrak Gallente Solacarium	Posted - 2011.04.15 18:34:00 - [59] No MySQL is garbage. They should use PostgreSQL or Oracle.
Kazuo Ishiguro House of Marbles	Posted - 2011.04.15 18:53:00 - [60] Originally by: Daesis Wrack Think up a system that makes the battle go faster, removing players from the system (and therefore lightening, rather than increasing, the server load), rather than slower. If you want fleet fights to actually be winnable (by either side), you have to make ships die. I've tended to favour this sort of approach, e.g. Quote: Warning: local space-time instabilities detected Quote: Notify: Your ship has been engulfed by a wormhole Quote: Local: Channel changed to J1035902 --- 34.4:1 mineral compression

Kazuo Ishiguro House of Marbles	Posted - 2011.04.15 19:25:00 - [61] Originally by: Khorkrak Axemaster, your arguments would be more convincing if you didn't appear to be trying so hard to sound intelligent. Here are some of the mistakes in your post that make you sound like a tool. "Myself and a lot of other people recently read the devblog" This sentence should begin with the word I not Myself. This is a rather comical and common blunder made when the writer is trying to sound professional or knowledgeable. It's easy to spot, so here's how to avoid this mistake: "Myself recently read the devblog" Does that not sound idiotic? A similar mistake occurs with I when that's used instead of me. Reasonable criticism so far. Quote: "In a worst case scenario" So there is more than one worst case scenario presumably? That makes no sense. Strictly speaking, it's possible that there could be a tie among such scenarios, but by Occam's razor I'd say it's more likely that he meant to use 'the' instead of 'a'. Quote: "And the speed of subcapital ships would matter less, making them less useful in general." Starting a sentence with And is poor grammar... There is no hard and fast rule of grammar regarding the position of 'and'. Although a lot of people do tend to avoid placing it at the start of a sentence, there's nothing wrong with doing so to generate a bit of rhetorical emphasis. Quote: while using the same adjective twice is bad style. I could have forgiven your other criticisms, but not this one. You suggest no alternative; this places you squarely in the camp of the elegant variationists. Did someone actually teach you that this was a principle to be respected at all costs, even in prose? Is the comparative of 'little' really so abhorrent to you that you can't bear the sight of it more than once per sentence? Quote: "The importance of the speed advantage that sub-capital ships have now would be diminished." In my opinion this is an entirely correct sentence both in meaning and construction. It would retain most of its meaning without the first three words, I suppose. --- 34.4:1 mineral compression
Axemaster	Posted - 2011.04.15 22:55:00 - [62] I'll have you know that I am perfectly capable of using correct grammar. I just don't give a crap. Get your head out of your ass.


Pages: 1 2 3 :: [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.