EVE Search - Why add titans & carriers with the current lag of fleet battles?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Why add titans & carriers with the current lag of fleet battles?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 5 post(s)
Rider Zane	Posted - 2005.11.11 14:19:00 - [31] Edited by: Rider Zane on 11/11/2005 14:23:36 Well i'd rather have TCP and lag than UDP and no lag. Why? because UDP in fleet battles would not work, imagine pressing shield boost and nothing happens? Imagine trying to turn off your shield booster and nothing happens? Imagine hitting to warp out and nothing happens!? In 100 vs 100 fleet battle on a sunday evening (worlds primetime for net usage) you are gonna loose a hell of a lot of packets. Worse still, UDP packets can arrive in any order depending on network path, latency etc. So wierd things could happen in a massive fleet fight. The solution is code optimizations and 64 bit monster yarrrdware to support those optimizations. Also users realising that they also have to eliminate things which contribute to thier client side lag.
Ander	Posted - 2005.11.11 14:32:00 - [32] Originally by: Rider Zane Edited by: Rider Zane on 11/11/2005 14:23:36 Well i'd rather have TCP and lag than UDP and no lag. Why? because UDP in fleet battles would not work, imagine pressing shield boost and nothing happens? Imagine trying to turn off your shield booster and nothing happens? Imagine hitting to warp out and nothing happens!? In 100 vs 100 fleet battle on a sunday evening (worlds primetime for net usage) you are gonna loose a hell of a lot of packets. Worse still, UDP packets can arrive in any order depending on network path, latency etc. So wierd things could happen in a massive fleet fight. The solution is code optimizations and 64 bit monster yarrrdware to support those optimizations. Also users realising that they also have to eliminate things which contribute to thier client side lag. This is why I proposed implementation of go-back-n or selective repeat over UDP. It'd be possible to optimize things which is NOT optimizable by packet defination in TCP while still retaining the functions of in-order packets and reliable transfer. Say that you implement an ARQ protocol such as selective repeat over UDP on Client -> server . This means your commands will be sent properly and kept getting sent until server ack is returned. But imagine that sending such things as relative directions of ships which would still be retransmitted over and over. Why should the server have to retransmit that lost directions when a new packet is issued shortly after with direction updates. This kind of info would be pretty conventient to have over raw UDP. But turn on the ARQ implementation on stuff that is crucial to be recieved. You see, even such things as damage dealt could be sent over UDP just fine. Cause if you have packetloss and server need to retransmit each damage dealt you're still going to be dead serverwise when those packets arrive acked and such. In that case a continous UDP update packet would been smoother and more sufficient.
Hllaxiu	Posted - 2005.11.11 14:32:00 - [33] Originally by: Oveur Edit: As can be seen in a number of dev blogs, we are also adding hardware. The total optimizations we're doing are far more than a couple of %. 3 x 5% is 15% you know But we're in eve! It must be a (1.05^3)^((1/3)^.25) = 1.11763799 increase!
Ander	Posted - 2005.11.11 14:35:00 - [34] Damn. That PDF which oveur posted was really interesting. I wish I'd been at that lecture. Is there no online video from the lecture or voice recording? Oh and another interesting item is the "EVE mobile" in the future of eve topic. Does this mean we'll see EVE going on J2ME or similar? Now THAT would be nifty.
gfldex	Posted - 2005.11.11 14:43:00 - [35] Originally by: Ander Say that you implement an ARQ protocol such as selective repeat over UDP on Client -> server . This means your commands will be sent properly and kept getting sent until server ack is returned. We already got such a wheel and it's called TCP. Btw. TCP is doing way more then just being reliant. UDP won't give you the option to lower outgoing traffic to reduce resends and resulting "noise" on the line. TCP is doing this quite well. Remember: Read _all_ related RFCs befor you make yourself a fool. :) -- $ perl -n -e 'print "Stop blameing pirates! Oveur is the root of all evil!\n" if m/podkill\|lost my ship\|gank\|gate camp\|Verone/;'
Ander	Posted - 2005.11.11 14:53:00 - [36] Edited by: Ander on 11/11/2005 14:53:44 Originally by: gfldex Originally by: Ander Say that you implement an ARQ protocol such as selective repeat over UDP on Client -> server . This means your commands will be sent properly and kept getting sent until server ack is returned. We already got such a wheel and it's called TCP. Btw. TCP is doing way more then just being reliant. UDP won't give you the option to lower outgoing traffic to reduce resends and resulting "noise" on the line. TCP is doing this quite well. Remember: Read _all_ related RFCs befor you make yourself a fool. :) I'm not saying that TCP is bad, but TCP still relies on ACK:ed packets. So there's still a lot of overhead in cases where such behavior of the protocol wouldnt be required. Thus is why I still wonder why CCP went ahead with TCP for all the traffic instead of portions which could well be run over UDP. I know very well how TCP works, but following the TCP "related" RFC's it's not impossible to mimic the behaviour of TCP over UDP which I've tried in a lab environment. Sure, some functions of TCP will be tough to mimic.. especially with the TCP flags portion for the lower layers of the networkmodel. But oh well. But still, I wonder why not UDP for some data and TCP for the "important data"?

Oveur	Posted - 2005.11.11 14:54:00 - [37] Originally by: Ander Damn. That PDF which oveur posted was really interesting. I wish I'd been at that lecture. Is there no online video from the lecture or voice recording? Oh and another interesting item is the "EVE mobile" in the future of eve topic. Does this mean we'll see EVE going on J2ME or similar? Now THAT would be nifty. The demo shown there is from a Windows Mobile device written in .Net using a SOAP interface to our cluster. Senior Producer EVE Online

Ander	Posted - 2005.11.11 14:56:00 - [38] Originally by: Oveur Originally by: Ander Damn. That PDF which oveur posted was really interesting. I wish I'd been at that lecture. Is there no online video from the lecture or voice recording? Oh and another interesting item is the "EVE mobile" in the future of eve topic. Does this mean we'll see EVE going on J2ME or similar? Now THAT would be nifty. The demo shown there is from a Windows Mobile device written in .Net using a SOAP interface to our cluster. Which demo are you refeering to? And do you think it's possible to get a sound recording of the lecture?

Oveur	Posted - 2005.11.11 14:59:00 - [39] Originally by: Ander Originally by: Oveur Originally by: Ander Damn. That PDF which oveur posted was really interesting. I wish I'd been at that lecture. Is there no online video from the lecture or voice recording? Oh and another interesting item is the "EVE mobile" in the future of eve topic. Does this mean we'll see EVE going on J2ME or similar? Now THAT would be nifty. The demo shown there is from a Windows Mobile device written in .Net using a SOAP interface to our cluster. Which demo are you refeering to? And do you think it's possible to get a sound recording of the lecture? The EVE Mobile demo. Senior Producer EVE Online

Ander	Posted - 2005.11.11 15:01:00 - [40] Originally by: Oveur Originally by: Ander Originally by: Oveur Originally by: Ander Damn. That PDF which oveur posted was really interesting. I wish I'd been at that lecture. Is there no online video from the lecture or voice recording? Oh and another interesting item is the "EVE mobile" in the future of eve topic. Does this mean we'll see EVE going on J2ME or similar? Now THAT would be nifty. The demo shown there is from a Windows Mobile device written in .Net using a SOAP interface to our cluster. Which demo are you refeering to? And do you think it's possible to get a sound recording of the lecture? The EVE Mobile demo. EVE Mobile demo? More info :) What are these secrets on which you speak of? Is it available to be seen somewhere?
Elissen	Posted - 2005.11.11 15:16:00 - [41] eve mobile photo from the FanFest ----- ICSC Member New: Jumpplanner tool - Plan your dreadnought travelroute!
hired goon	Posted - 2005.11.11 15:17:00 - [42] Why doesn't Eve use IPX/SPX? It's faster than UDP and TCP put together times ten squared to infinity no returns. -omg-
Xantina	Posted - 2005.11.11 15:24:00 - [43] But oooooh ... Titans... OvO (This station is now the ultimate power in the universe. I suggest we use it!)
Moadyb	Posted - 2005.11.11 16:19:00 - [44] Wow, as usual, the thread went off road pretty quickly. Now irrespective of TCP, UDP, @#$DF or whatever, I haven't read much regarding my concern, which is promoting bigger fleet battles thru the addition of carrier & titans. Which I think is rather counterproductive with the current server loads. Originally by: Oveur Edit: As can be seen in a number of dev blogs, we are also adding hardware. The total optimizations we're doing are far more than a couple of %. 3 x 5% is 15% you know Thats all very nice (I really mean that, not being sarcastic). But do you really think 15% or even 30% optimization is going to solve thinks like 5 mins module activation delays in fleet battles?
Elissen	Posted - 2005.11.11 16:29:00 - [45] Originally by: hired goon Why doesn't Eve use IPX/SPX? It's faster than UDP and TCP put together times ten squared to infinity no returns. The internet and IPX don't go very well together. I really have to dig into my memory, but I don't think IPX can be routed. EVE isn't a LAN game. Originally by: Moadyb ... Thats all very nice (I really mean that, not being sarcastic). But do you really think 15% or even 30% optimization is going to solve thinks like 5 mins module activation delays in fleet battles? lag on the serverside isn't something that works linear. It's not like add one ship to a scenario of 100 and everything slows down 1%. It's more exponentioally (I think). A improvement of 15% will probaly make a bigger difference then you might realize. A while back we added an oprimalization at a system at work that we expected to have a 1-2% preformance increase. It actually turned out that one subsystem executes 75% faster because of that ----- ICSC Member New: Jumpplanner tool - Plan your dreadnought travelroute!
Tar om	Posted - 2005.11.11 16:41:00 - [46] OMG you have JUST GOT TO implement/release that mobile client. I know you wouldn't want to PvP or run missions but just having access to station functions from your PocketPC device would be... fantastic. /me dribbles Name your price! -- We are the Octavian Vanguard www.octavianvanguard.net "The belief in the possibility of a short decisive war appears to be one of the most ancient and dangerous of human illusions."
Sobeseki Pawi	Posted - 2005.11.11 17:04:00 - [47] Originally by: Elissen Originally by: hired goon Why doesn't Eve use IPX/SPX? It's faster than UDP and TCP put together times ten squared to infinity no returns. The internet and IPX don't go very well together. I really have to dig into my memory, but I don't think IPX can be routed. EVE isn't a LAN game. Actually, back in the day I played Descent II over the net (IPX/SPX) with a third party program called Khan97 (I think). It worked great. So its possible, but no idea how it would scale up to Eve. ~Captain Cutie, HFS Event Horizon Biomass fears me. Sovereignty 2.0
Ander	Posted - 2005.11.11 17:10:00 - [48] Originally by: Sobeseki Pawi Originally by: Elissen Originally by: hired goon Why doesn't Eve use IPX/SPX? It's faster than UDP and TCP put together times ten squared to infinity no returns. The internet and IPX don't go very well together. I really have to dig into my memory, but I don't think IPX can be routed. EVE isn't a LAN game. Actually, back in the day I played Descent II over the net (IPX/SPX) with a third party program called Khan97 (I think). It worked great. So its possible, but no idea how it would scale up to Eve. Khan97 encapsulated the IPX packets over TCP and provided a "virtual" lan between nodes. So it'd actually be BAD, very BAD with eve ;)
Sobeseki Pawi	Posted - 2005.11.11 17:11:00 - [49] Originally by: Ander Originally by: Sobeseki Pawi Originally by: Elissen Originally by: hired goon Why doesn't Eve use IPX/SPX? It's faster than UDP and TCP put together times ten squared to infinity no returns. The internet and IPX don't go very well together. I really have to dig into my memory, but I don't think IPX can be routed. EVE isn't a LAN game. Actually, back in the day I played Descent II over the net (IPX/SPX) with a third party program called Khan97 (I think). It worked great. So its possible, but no idea how it would scale up to Eve. Khan97 encapsulated the IPX packets over TCP and provided a "virtual" lan between nodes. So it'd actually be BAD, very BAD with eve ;) Ah, well I never got into the mechanics of it :p ~Captain Cutie, HFS Event Horizon Biomass fears me. Sovereignty 2.0
James Lyrus	Posted - 2005.11.11 17:53:00 - [50] Originally by: Tar om OMG you have JUST GOT TO implement/release that mobile client. I know you wouldn't want to PvP or run missions but just having access to station functions from your PocketPC device would be... fantastic. /me dribbles Name your price! NO!. DON'T RELEASE IT. I WOULD DO NO MORE WORK EVER.
Gaelron	Posted - 2005.11.11 19:07:00 - [51] Originally by: James Lyrus Originally by: Tar om OMG you have JUST GOT TO implement/release that mobile client. I know you wouldn't want to PvP or run missions but just having access to station functions from your PocketPC device would be... fantastic. /me dribbles Name your price! NO!. DON'T RELEASE IT. I WOULD DO NO MORE WORK EVER. Quoted for truth.....but really checking your skills from a mobile device would be great!!!
Lee N	Posted - 2005.11.11 19:30:00 - [52] EVE Mobile.. I wants it.
Dr Tetrahydrocannabinol	Posted - 2005.11.11 19:55:00 - [53] Originally by: Winterblink Because Titans have weapons that can destroy hundreds of battleships with a single shot, and walla! no more lag. ohhhhhhh so thats the sekrit lag removing tool that they have been planning all this time --------------------------------------------- Oveur > CUZ IM EXTREEEEEEEEEEEEEEME!!!! [TheKiller8 - Uh what? - Flash Video]
Embattle	Posted - 2005.11.11 20:29:00 - [54] They are romoving lag so that the titan can use lag cannons ----------- I would have a sig but it might break a arm, leg or even worse a rule.
Taketa De	Posted - 2005.11.11 20:36:00 - [55] Edited by: Taketa De on 11/11/2005 20:36:20 If I could log in over my cell phone or PDA (non windows mobile tho... java client would be nice ) just to change skills... well that would be more then enough for me. Eidt: On second thought, add in markets and assets too and it would be beyond good.
Swedish Bob	Posted - 2005.11.11 20:48:00 - [56] Looking at that paper I'm actually suprised that CCP manages to run the game on a 200Mb connection. I would have thought they would have had at least a 1000Mb connection.
Locke DieDrake	Posted - 2005.11.11 21:07:00 - [57] Am I the only one that thinks it's funny when ametures try and suggest fixes for hopelessly complicated system that they couldn't hope to understand? I don't mean to flame anyone. Because a few of you seem to actually know what you are talking about. But on the flip side of that, even though you know something about networks, you couldn't possibly know how eve works. And even though I don't know either, I can safely say it's alot more complicated than you think. And, I have faith that the devs know what they are doing. If they didn't, eve would not be here today. So sit back, and let CCP work. I think it's likely that they can solve the problems to our satisfaction. OH, and just for the record, large ships don't create lag, nor do large ships mean bigger fleets. It's not so much the 5 titans causing lag as the 100 cruisers.
Ante	Posted - 2005.11.11 21:13:00 - [58] Originally by: Embattle They are romoving lag so that the titan can use lag cannons So that's how they take out a hundred battleships at once...
Batar Fireheart	Posted - 2005.11.12 01:10:00 - [59] Please excuse this ignorant question.. I am no whiz when it comes to packets but find it quite interesting. Is it possible to cross utilize both tcp and udp? for example: use tcp for more important commands ( primary) and udp for less important commands ( secondary ) or would this not work? "MAY YOUR WALLET BE FULL OF ISK AND YOUR CANNONS BLESSED"

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.