|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Sirane Elrek
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
177
|
Posted - 2013.07.30 20:06:00 -
[1] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:Now, in regards to slowdown tidi lag **** all, if I press a button and don't see a result, it's slowdown/tidi/lag/fuckallbadshit. If you press a button and don't see a result, that's lag.
Murk Paradox wrote:If I blackscreen from server overload and cannot press a button with immediate result it's slowdown/tidi/lag/fuckallbadshit. If you blackscreen from server overload, that's lag.
If you have TiDi and no lag, you press a button and your result is still immediate. Your guns turn on when you press the button. They turn off when you press the button. Your ship starts locking other ships when you press the button. Locking takes longer, and so do warps, and aligning, and most other actions. But the commands are still processed immediately.
The whole point of TiDi is to slow down the simulation so that the server has enough (wall clock) time per simulation tick to evaluate everything that should happen in that tick. This is in contrast to lag, where the server does not have enough time to calculate everything that should be happening in that tick, and defers some commands to a later tick. |
Sirane Elrek
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
177
|
Posted - 2013.07.30 20:18:00 -
[2] - Quote
Onictus wrote:Not a disruption, its a chance of rate, no more no less. The effect is that the node has 10 times as long to process calls and queries.
Granted we can still lag it after all of that, but its MUCH more reliable than pre-TiDi times. We can call it lag all day long, but the fact is, when a node is just TiDi'ed, it will still process all entered commands in a timely fashion. Unlike lag, in which it doesn't and defers processing to a far later point in time. |
Sirane Elrek
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
177
|
Posted - 2013.07.30 20:32:00 -
[3] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:Lag is the time from point a to point b to point a again.
Your definition of lag is utterly useless. In fact that definition is so terrible, that I can claim removing a fleet booster creates lag. How? Well point A is "Your remote rep is inactive", point B is "Your remote rep is active". If you have a fleet booster with a rapid repair link, your reps cycle faster than without, so you can go A to B to A in a shorter time than when he dies. |
Sirane Elrek
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
179
|
Posted - 2013.08.05 01:04:00 -
[4] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:8.The redeeming value in it would be to make for more dynamic gameplay where a force density of 2000 Megathrons wasn't necessary to accomplish something. (It's hit-and-run, not hit-and-stand-around-waiting-for-an-arbitrary-timer-to-tick-down-then-slug-it-out-with-the-enemy's-main-force-and-fail-to-accomplish-the-objective-if-you-lose-that-fight.) Besides that, maybe I just don't want to play EVE on your schedule. when you say "make for dynamic gameplay" what you mean is "GSF and PL burn down every player owned structure in EVE within 24 hours"
e: except for the ones in highsec I guess because concord |
Sirane Elrek
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
179
|
Posted - 2013.08.05 01:07:00 -
[5] - Quote
i mean we've already seen in the east that a massed super blob can grind timerless stations in less than 10 minutes each and they have a bit more hp than towers do so guess what will happen |
Sirane Elrek
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
181
|
Posted - 2013.08.06 09:48:00 -
[6] - Quote
since you continuously ignore the most important point here I'll put it at the top once: you can kill an unstronted tower in less than a siege cycle with a sufficient number of dreads. explain how you're proposing to form a defense in less than 5 minutes
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:1.That's a prediction about a system that has unstable elements and emergent properties. 2.If a reinforcement timer wasn't an automatic, guaranteed defense, then there would be no reason to respond with a defense fleet. There would be nothing to defend. 3.That's a prediction about a system that has unstable elements and emergent properties. 4.That's a prediction about a system that has unstable elements and emergent properties. your proposed system has some properties that we know of though: 1) a system cap of X people guarantees that the first group to stuff X people into the system wins by default because it is literally impossible for other people to contest it b) no reinforcement timer means you can shoot the structure without recourse by the defending party because due to 1) they can't even be on the same grid as the tower III) short of a massive number of spies across all alliances with a dread fleet you won't even know that your tower has died until you pull the killmail from api
there's nothing emergent and unstable about it, in fact it's pretty clear to everyone who has shot structures at some point in their eve career how a timerless tower handles, because guess what people sometimes forget to put stront in
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:7.Why hasn't this happened, yet? Is it because that 5 man high sec corp has a day or two of guaranteed invulnerability, allowing them to form a "defense fleet" to fight off a 500 man blob from null sec? Pfffft . . . it hasn't happened yet because shooting towers in subcaps while boat is leading the fleet is one of the worst possible experiences you can have in this game, worse than things like "getting shot by blap titans while blackscreened in the good old pre-tidi days" or "ratting"
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:How do you know what the mechanic was intended to do? Do you work for CCP? And, how is not having to be present to defend your stuff a "game" versus losing what you didn't bother to protect being a "shitshow"? you have to show to defend your stuff because if you don't, you'll lose your tower once it comes out of rf of course your proposed system won't have defense fleets at all because alliances all over eve have repeatedly shown that it's possible to kill an unstronted tower in a single siege cycle, good luck getting a defense fleet rallied and to your tower in 5 minutes (that's assuming you notice your tower getting shot immediately when the dreads start sieging which is ridiculous in itself)
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:This idea is just a passing notion on alternatives and augmentations to "the system by which the server handles lag" a.k.a. TiDi. I mostly mention it hoping for someone to come into this thread and shoot it down in spectacular fashion and hopefully teach me something. So far, all I have seen is a bunch of null-bears complaining that it's not fair, because people would violence their space stuff. you mentioned it because you have no idea how towers, or reinforcement timers, or sov, or dreads work |
Sirane Elrek
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
181
|
Posted - 2013.08.06 17:39:00 -
[7] - Quote
explain how you're going to mount a defense within a single siege cycle (5 minutes)
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:1)How many systems do you seriously think you can cap? If you have enough players that you can cap every system in null, why shouldn't you just win the game? I don't have a problem with that. Why would you? enough systems at once to kill the tower I want to kill (it's one, a tower doesn't exist in multiple systems simultaneously) and when i kill the tower i can immediately afterwards cap another system and kill another tower because the first tower is dead so you don't have to cap that system anymore.
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:b)No reinforcement timer means you would have to have a networks of scouts and sentries, not to mention an emergency response fleet, and the ability to withstand attacks on important assets. fine. you have a network of scouts and sentries, and a response fleet at the ready, 24 hours a day. your enemy is still one-cycling a tower (this means you have to get into the system and kill or at least tackle the dreads within 5 minutes). i dunno if you noticed it but dreads have jump drives, i.e. you can't properly preempt them on their way to shoot the tower, they just jump right next to it, push butan, and jump out.
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:III)Even the super rich have people that manage their assets and maintain their properties. Why should you be able to AFK your space empire? Why shouldn't you or somebody have to go and look at your tower to make sure it was still there churning out ISK for you? yeah we have those too, they're called "space pixies"GSOL and they're the guys who tend to our towers because turns out if you drop a tower somewhere and then expect it to autonomously sh-ūt isk into your corp wallet until the end of time that isn't actually what happens
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:You live in null security space. That means "no security". Well, what the hell would you call a day long cloak of invincibility for your space house or your space factory? i'd call it a game design trade-off. if you don't have it then there's no point at all in dropping any kind of structure because it's impossible to defend. the reason for that being the point you conveniently choose to ignore continually: you can't mount a defense against an attack on structures without reinforcement timers because you don't have any reasonable amount of time (the amount of time you have is 5 minutes (please explain how to counter an attack within 5 minutes)) |
Sirane Elrek
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
181
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 08:38:00 -
[8] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:So, now, force projection is a problem? I can get on that bandwagon. That's actually an important component of the argument that TiDi gives advantage to the larger side, because the attackers are probably under TiDi (read:gimped) and the people rushing to defend against the attack are probably not under TiDi (read:moving at full speed). ahahahah right how about you instead talk about stuff you understand, like mining ice in osmon or spamming jita local
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:if you break everyone else's stuff, they'd have to be stupid to sell you the tools you need to continue to break their stuff. sure just tell me how i can set my trit sell order to "will not sell to goons"
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:You have to secure your supply routes and store ships and materials. it's called "jump freighters" and "npc stations". unless you suggest we can take npc stations as well.
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:Think about it: There is a lull in activity while something is coming out of reinforced, then a flurry of activity as one side tries to move the structure out of its vulnerable state and the other side tries to destroy/flip it. If you spread the potential for that activity out over a longer duration a->y, there will be less incentive for groups of players to overload the system at time z. i guess there won't be much of an incentive to overload the system because i can just jump in a 250 man dread fleet and kill the tower before you even know it was under attack (because it happened in less than 5 minutes). so is your new suggestion now to make structures have more hp so people with a 250 man dread fleet can't just kill it dead in less than 5 minutes?
please explain how you're proposing to mount a defense in less than 5 minutes |
Sirane Elrek
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
181
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 08:40:00 -
[9] - Quote
i may sound like a broken record here, but for some reason you have missed that question a couple of times so i'm just posting it again so you see it
please explain how you're proposing to mount a defense in less than 5 minutes (less than 2 minutes in fact according to RubyPorto, and i have no reason to doubt his numbers) |
Sirane Elrek
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
182
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 12:22:00 -
[10] - Quote
Victor Dathar wrote:How to defend your space in 5 seconds:
1. Offline a defensive SBU 2. Miller Time
no you see SBUs won't exist in the new world order because having stuff go invulnerable on certain conditions is bad gameplay:
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:Defense would be if you stationed a force near the structure to combat any force that might try to attack it. Defense is expensive, and it doesn't always work. |
|
Sirane Elrek
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
182
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 12:29:00 -
[11] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:I'm not proposing anyone mount a defense in 5 minutes that can repel 250 dreadnoughts. That should take a miracle or some sort of space magic. But, you should be planning a defense of your structure before you ever anchor and online it, so that gives you more than 5 minutes. First rule of EVE: Don't fly (or anchor) what you can't afford to lose. "don't drop towers because you can't defend them anyway, and don't live outside of npc stations because you'll get locked out of your stuff faster than you can say supercalifragilisticexpialidocious" |
Sirane Elrek
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
182
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 14:31:00 -
[12] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:You don't think Goonswarm is capable of defending ANY towers or stations under this scenario? Not even 1? yeah we could probably keep two or so stations because we're large enough for around-the-clock coverage but you can count the number of alliances who can field a defense against 250 dreads at all times on one hand. of a blind lumberjack.
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:Your question alludes to why there is a "blue donut". No one successfully attacks the blue donut because the blue donut will always be given the chance to outnumber them, always, guaranteed, 100%, unless some fool doesn't put strontium clathrates in his tower or something ridiculous. funny, you must have missed what happened in fountain two weeks ago wait which of us is the blue donut here, is it us or test |
Sirane Elrek
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
182
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 19:51:00 -
[13] - Quote
you know in civilized countries a donut looks like a ring, not like a crescent that's why literally everyone in EVE besides yourself is talking about all of sov 0.0 when they're speak of the mythical "blue donut" but don't let that stop you from redefining "blue donut" as "CFC"
(also TEST is the largest alliance if you go by members, and somewhere in the also-ran category if you go by any other metric, but certainly nowhere near "second" or "most powerful") |
|
|
|