| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Hellraiza666
   |
Posted - 2005.11.22 19:45:00 -
[1]
Hi,
After talking to people, and watching videos of old fleet battles(where they even have drones out!!), i'm just wondering, do any of you know, or can think of the MAIN reason why fleet fights are moreorless impossible lately.
thanks
Hell
--------------------------------------------
In War There Are No Runners Up...
|
SengH
|
Posted - 2005.11.22 19:47:00 -
[2]
Edited by: SengH on 22/11/2005 19:48:02
Yes.... they yanked the 0.0 nodes to power the empire ones so a majority of their customers will be happy because 0.0 is a minority. That and maybe coupled with a crappy loadbalancing system. Its the only explanation that makes sense.
Edit: OFC they cant do a dev blog saying... ohhh we reduced the number of server nodes allocated to 0.0 because we have alot more empire people. All us 0.0 people would be up in arms.
|
Lunas Feelgood
|
Posted - 2005.11.22 19:52:00 -
[3]
 Originally by: SengH
Edited by: SengH on 22/11/2005 19:48:02
Yes.... they yanked the 0.0 nodes to power the empire ones so a majority of their customers will be happy because 0.0 is a minority. That and maybe coupled with a crappy loadbalancing system. Its the only explanation that makes sense.
Edit: OFC they cant do a dev blog saying... ohhh we reduced the number of server nodes allocated to 0.0 because we have alot more empire people. All us 0.0 people would be up in arms.
yeps and and the 2000 new people on trial accounts in emp doesnt help it either.. CCP stop getting more customers, the playerbase is to big atm. And you succes gonna be you downfall if you dont do something
 |
Torquemanda Corteaz
|
Posted - 2005.11.22 19:54:00 -
[4]
increased player population at any given time over the days of old?
|
Quanteeri
|
Posted - 2005.11.22 19:59:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Quanteeri on 22/11/2005 20:00:06
As far as I can remember people have complained about fleet lag. This is nothing new.
In fact, I believe you can run sizable battles now without lag that would've lagged out in the past.
:) |
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2005.11.22 20:05:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Quanteeri
Edited by: Quanteeri on 22/11/2005 20:00:06
As far as I can remember people have complained about fleet lag. This is nothing new.
In fact, I believe you can run sizable battles now without lag that would've lagged out in the past.
No, you can't.
We had 100v 100's a year ago with not much lag.
Now, moving more then 100 ships somewhere through empty systems alone will kill whole nodes.
I think part of the issue is in seesion changes. It's the jumps when things go sour, not the in-system activity. At least part of the time it is verymuch notably this part of perfomrance that kills gameplay.
Other times it's probably a combination of overloaded cpu's combined with this session change crap, for example with fleets jumping in on eachother.
_______________________________________________
Power to the players !
|
Tamala
|
Posted - 2005.11.22 20:11:00 -
[7]
A non-technical explanation of why you may be experiencing lag.
Read that. Any further questions, message me in game.
|
Hellraiza666
|
Posted - 2005.11.22 20:28:00 -
[8]
tamala, that is a great thread, however it only explains what lag is and why we get it, not why it fleet battles have changed so much in past year or so, its gone from being able to have 100vs100, to the game lagging when a gang of 7 jumps into empty system....
--------------------------------------------
In War There Are No Runners Up...
|
Xenophilia
|
Posted - 2005.11.22 20:47:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Hellraiza666
tamala, that is a great thread, however it only explains what lag is and why we get it, not why it fleet battles have changed so much in past year or so, its gone from being able to have 100vs100, to the game lagging when a gang of 7 jumps into empty system....
The player numbers have gone up.
|
Rincey
|
Posted - 2005.11.22 20:52:00 -
[10]
just down to more people is it not?
|
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2005.11.22 20:55:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Rod Blaine on 22/11/2005 20:55:56
Originally by: Rincey
just down to more people is it not?
Then why no foresight ?
After all, player numbers have been rising for more then a year, with no real big sudden increases other then the EnB closure a year or so ago.
And anyway, the most noticeable decrease in performance happened with the last large exodus content patch if i recall right, in june or thereabouts.
_______________________________________________
Power to the players !
|
Winterblink
|
Posted - 2005.11.22 20:58:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Rod Blaine
Edited by: Rod Blaine on 22/11/2005 20:55:56
Originally by: Rincey
just down to more people is it not?
Then why no foresight ?
After all, player numbers have been rising for more then a year, with no real big sudden increases other then the EnB closure a year or so ago.
And anyway, the most noticeable decrease in performance happened with the last large exodus content patch if i recall right, in june or thereabouts.
Maybe the POSes are causing a portion of the performance problems then? Who knows, every hour the thing chomps down more trade goods and fuel, each every hour after their own unique activation time.
|
Earthan
|
Posted - 2005.11.22 21:01:00 -
[13]
Yes imho also exodus brought the decrease in performance.Still seems CCP is on right track to change it.
*****************************
A solution to gank/to much dmg.Plz read and reply.Make Eve more tactical!!
|
Hellraiza666
|
Posted - 2005.11.22 21:10:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Winterblink
Maybe the POSes are causing a portion of the performance problems then? Who knows, every hour the thing chomps down more trade goods and fuel, each every hour after their own unique activation time.
Actually, i think you might be on to something there 
o well, still hoping a Dev might answer the question 
--------------------------------------------
In War There Are No Runners Up...
|
Tamala
|
Posted - 2005.11.22 21:12:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Winterblink
Originally by: Rod Blaine
Edited by: Rod Blaine on 22/11/2005 20:55:56
Originally by: Rincey
just down to more people is it not?
Then why no foresight ?
After all, player numbers have been rising for more then a year, with no real big sudden increases other then the EnB closure a year or so ago.
And anyway, the most noticeable decrease in performance happened with the last large exodus content patch if i recall right, in june or thereabouts.
Maybe the POSes are causing a portion of the performance problems then? Who knows, every hour the thing chomps down more trade goods and fuel, each every hour after their own unique activation time.
That's a database change. I very much doubt it would have any effect on the gameplay servers.
|
Hellraiza666
|
Posted - 2005.11.23 16:38:00 -
[16]
still no dev/gm answer =(
--------------------------------------------
In War There Are No Runners Up...
|
PKlavins
|
Posted - 2005.11.23 18:19:00 -
[17]
we want official answer!
we want official answer!
we want official answer!
ctrl+c aint difficult to press all day 
-----------------------------------------------
|
Hellraiza666
|
Posted - 2005.11.23 19:52:00 -
[18]
we want official answer!
--------------------------------------------
In War There Are No Runners Up...
|
|
Oveur
|
Posted - 2005.11.23 20:03:00 -
[19]
It still amazes me that people think I'll answer their threads rather than other threads just because they put my name/Dev/CCP/etc in the topic.
Damnit, I just answered 
Senior Producer
EVE Online
|
|
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2005.11.23 20:14:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Rod Blaine on 23/11/2005 20:21:11
Originally by: Oveur
It still amazes me that people think I'll answer their threads rather than other threads just because they put my name/Dev/CCP/etc in the topic.
Damnit, I just answered
WIN !!!!!
Anyways, before we get the whole optimalisation riddlydiddly again, you really think it's gonna cut it ? Are you ainming at the capability to run a game with 40K concurrent users without much in the way of serverside lag within the next half year or are you patching t5hings up along the way ?
It has been looking far too much like the latter tbh. With an unacceptable delay worked into your actions as well.
Now, come on, tell us that lag and instability is going to be reduced to at least early/pre-exodus levels (no not early gemini levels either please).
At the moment, I'm not paying for Eve anymore. One major cause of that is lag. Are you going to solve it, or are you going to patch it up (I'like to add again here, but in all honesty you haven't even patched anything up yet have you ?)
_______________________________________________
Power to the players !
|
PKlavins
|
Posted - 2005.11.23 20:15:00 -
[21]
well...we got a dev answering...now lets try...
WE WANT INFORMATION FROM DEVS!
WE WANT INFORMATION FROM DEVS!
WE WANT INFORMATION FROM DEVS!
-----------------------------------------------
|
|
Oveur
|
Posted - 2005.11.23 20:19:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Rod Blaine
Originally by: Oveur
It still amazes me that people think I'll answer their threads rather than other threads just because they put my name/Dev/CCP/etc in the topic.
Damnit, I just answered
WIN !!!!!
Anyways, before we get the whole optimalisation riddlydiddly again, you really think it's gonna cut it ? Are you ainming at the capability to run a game with 40K concurrent users without much in the way of serverside lag within the next half year or are you patching t5hings up along the way ?
It has been looking far too much like the latter tbh. No I dont have solutions, but that doesn't mean I cant have an opinion.
You either patched something badly, prepared badly, anticipated badly, calculated badly or are screwing us over on this subject.
Now, come on, tell us which one it is please. I'm glad I can pay with gametime codes right now, cause I sure know CCP aint getting anymore of my money anymore.
The current plan is to exchange 3-year old P4 2.8Ghz Xeon's with 64 bit Opterons blade servers, most likely dual-core but they run at lower clock speeds. We'd just need more blades if we don't go dual-core.
We might use the old stuff for very specific and non-cpu based activity (RAM etc.) like we do to some extent today but gameplay is on all the new stuff.
We spend more and more time optimizing and have never been doing so much of it before. 40K concurrent? Don't know, 30K most likely. Now we just need it all to utilize 64 bit.
Senior Producer
EVE Online
|
|
PKlavins
|
Posted - 2005.11.23 20:22:00 -
[23]
niiice
can anyone tell us when thid will happen? so we can prepare for it 
-----------------------------------------------
|
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2005.11.23 20:25:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Oveur
Originally by: Rod Blaine
Originally by: Oveur
It still amazes me that people think I'll answer their threads rather than other threads just because they put my name/Dev/CCP/etc in the topic.
Damnit, I just answered
WIN !!!!!
Anyways, before we get the whole optimalisation riddlydiddly again, you really think it's gonna cut it ? Are you ainming at the capability to run a game with 40K concurrent users without much in the way of serverside lag within the next half year or are you patching t5hings up along the way ?
It has been looking far too much like the latter tbh. No I dont have solutions, but that doesn't mean I cant have an opinion.
You either patched something badly, prepared badly, anticipated badly, calculated badly or are screwing us over on this subject.
Now, come on, tell us which one it is please. I'm glad I can pay with gametime codes right now, cause I sure know CCP aint getting anymore of my money anymore.
The current plan is to exchange 3-year old P4 2.8Ghz Xeon's with 64 bit Opterons blade servers, most likely dual-core but they run at lower clock speeds. We'd just need more blades if we don't go dual-core.
We might use the old stuff for very specific and non-cpu based activity (RAM etc.) like we do to some extent today but gameplay is on all the new stuff.
We spend more and more time optimizing and have never been doing so much of it before. 40K concurrent? Don't know, 30K most likely. Now we just need it all to utilize 64 bit.
Ok, i edited my post btw, first version was overly assinine, thanks for not chewing me up over it.
30K concurrent, and soon, right ? I mean soon as in RL soon.
That sounds acceptable I must admit. Let's hope it comes true as well.
I assume you've got subsequent plans ready for when that 30K goes btw ? Cause for one, less lag will result in a number of returning players, and the numbers of new players seem to be rising as steadily as they've always done. By past (more recent past, post-exodus) rates, I'd guess that 30K is hit around halfway 2006 isn't it ? And with the neccesary bad (or good) luck, it might even be sooner.
_______________________________________________
Power to the players !
|
Tony Blair'witch
|
Posted - 2005.11.23 20:28:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Oveur
It still amazes me that people think I'll answer their threads rather than other threads just because they put my name/Dev/CCP/etc in the topic.
Damnit, I just answered
You having a forum responce day or something... in my 1.5years ingame i've never seen so many DEV posts...
|
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2005.11.23 20:30:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Tony Blair'witch
Originally by: Oveur
It still amazes me that people think I'll answer their threads rather than other threads just because they put my name/Dev/CCP/etc in the topic.
Damnit, I just answered
You having a forum responce day or something... in my 1.5years ingame i've never seen so many DEV posts...
Yeah, he does that whenever he's working on a blog it seems.
My guess is Oveur gets some inspiration from player posts so he can word his blogs just right so we dont get even mroe agitated and draw even wilder conclusions then we already do after every blog.
Of course, my job is making sure that effort goes to waste, so in the mean time we get some extra devposts, good huh ?
_______________________________________________
Power to the players !
|
|
Oveur
|
Posted - 2005.11.23 20:31:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Rod Blaine
Originally by: Oveur
Originally by: Rod Blaine
Originally by: Oveur
It still amazes me that people think I'll answer their threads rather than other threads just because they put my name/Dev/CCP/etc in the topic.
Damnit, I just answered
WIN !!!!!
Anyways, before we get the whole optimalisation riddlydiddly again, you really think it's gonna cut it ? Are you ainming at the capability to run a game with 40K concurrent users without much in the way of serverside lag within the next half year or are you patching t5hings up along the way ?
It has been looking far too much like the latter tbh. No I dont have solutions, but that doesn't mean I cant have an opinion.
You either patched something badly, prepared badly, anticipated badly, calculated badly or are screwing us over on this subject.
Now, come on, tell us which one it is please. I'm glad I can pay with gametime codes right now, cause I sure know CCP aint getting anymore of my money anymore.
The current plan is to exchange 3-year old P4 2.8Ghz Xeon's with 64 bit Opterons blade servers, most likely dual-core but they run at lower clock speeds. We'd just need more blades if we don't go dual-core.
We might use the old stuff for very specific and non-cpu based activity (RAM etc.) like we do to some extent today but gameplay is on all the new stuff.
We spend more and more time optimizing and have never been doing so much of it before. 40K concurrent? Don't know, 30K most likely. Now we just need it all to utilize 64 bit.
Ok, i edited my post btw, first version was overly assinine, thanks for not chewing me up over it.
30K concurrent, and soon, right ? I mean soon as in RL soon.
That sounds acceptable I must admit. Let's hope it comes true as well.
I assume you've got subsequent plans ready for when that 30K goes btw ? Cause for one, less lag will result in a number of returning players, and the numbers of new players seem to be rising as steadily as they've always done. By past (more recent past, post-exodus) rates, I'd guess that 30K is hit around halfway 2006 isn't it ? And with the neccesary bad (or good) luck, it might even be sooner.
No, at our growth rate we wont hit 30K until late next year or mid 2007 since churn is always increasing the older the game gets. We actually have quite low churn so we might hit this faster but lets just point one thing out, 30K concurrent means doubling us today - 160.000 accounts.
I can only dream of how many people I can have working on EVE with such a big subscriber base income 
Well, and how much more hardware we can get
Senior Producer
EVE Online
|
|
|
Oveur
|
Posted - 2005.11.23 20:34:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Rod Blaine
Originally by: Tony Blair'witch
Originally by: Oveur
It still amazes me that people think I'll answer their threads rather than other threads just because they put my name/Dev/CCP/etc in the topic.
Damnit, I just answered
You having a forum responce day or something... in my 1.5years ingame i've never seen so many DEV posts...
Yeah, he does that whenever he's working on a blog it seems.
My guess is Oveur gets some inspiration from player posts so he can word his blogs just right so we dont get even mroe agitated and draw even wilder conclusions then we already do after every blog.
Of course, my job is making sure that effort goes to waste, so in the mean time we get some extra devposts, good huh ?
Excellent teamwork, kinda like good cop/bad cop!
Wait, I'm the nerfer, so am I the bad cop? 
Senior Producer
EVE Online
|
|
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2005.11.23 20:34:00 -
[29]
Well, 30K ftw then, go for it.
If it makes the game playable in group mode again then I'm all for it. In the mean time I've resorted to hiding in what's aguably one of Eve's ten most distant systems in existence. So far the lag is still bearable here 
_______________________________________________
Power to the players !
|
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2005.11.23 20:35:00 -
[30]
As long as I'm not the *** sailor
_______________________________________________
Power to the players !
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |