Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Wukwuk
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 00:30:00 -
[121]
No
|
Taizu Lilith
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 00:42:00 -
[122]
No, there are already too much resources for the population.
|
hired goon
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 00:48:00 -
[123]
Lmao Sorja, pwnt!
And no. -omg-
|
pardux
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 00:51:00 -
[124]
no
|
Pow3r Surg3
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 00:53:00 -
[125]
your stupid....and No is my and everyones answer.
|
Balban Cain
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 01:08:00 -
[126]
Edited by: Balban Cain on 19/12/2005 01:08:41
Originally by: Arthalion Thoidon
That sums up my other post, just one thing, the dutch for no is nee, not geen. geen = none.
I just typed ônoö in to a translation website, and copied the results, I can barely type English let alone another language.
And it does not matter how you slice it the answer would still be no, single server design is the base foundation of Eve, if you remove that, then all the player contents in the world would not make Eve any more special, then any other massively multiplayer online game around.
The fact that everyone plays under one roof is one of the reasons why I came to Eve, and it is one of the reasons why I still play today, Eve is special
|
Edison Frisk
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 01:12:00 -
[127]
Oi sorja, NO!
|
Copine Callmeknau
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 01:18:00 -
[128]
Edited by: Copine Callmeknau on 19/12/2005 01:21:44 Hey, while you're at it put a level based system in! And more downtime, yeah!
-------
With five million sheep in this army I seem to be the only one fit to command
|
Katya Detia
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 01:20:00 -
[129]
The day tranq is split.... is the day i will leave EvE. It will ruin the game.. EvE is about one universe that everyone can effect, live in and be apart of.
So.. NO
Join Black Sea Industries today!!! |
Szordin
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 01:23:00 -
[130]
Actually I think that if they did shards, it would kill the game. Because of how the economy in the game works.
The effort it would take to balance the "shards" equally to allow the economy to work correctly, is probably not worth the effort.
Of course thats just my opinion.
|
|
Na'Axin
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 01:30:00 -
[131]
Originally by: Aion Amarra I also say no. The day Eve is sharded would be the day I quit as well.
Pretty much the biggest appeal about Eve is that everyone plays in a single persistant world. Players can make a name for themselves and be known everywhere. We have the currently well known big alliances and everything.
Besides I honestly doubt that sharding would fix the lag. Either CCP would have to split up the current server hardware to handle two worlds, which would still put the same strain on the same hardware (the only advantage maybe being that the load is distributed over the single servers a little more evenly) or they would have to practically double their amount of servers, which would pretty much also fix the lag when only one persistant world exists.
And how exaclty would you want the setting up of a second game world to take place? SPlit the current server in two to distribute the players evenly? I guarantee that a large amount of players would quit. Create a new server from scratch, that does not yet have an even remotely working economy? No seeded T2 BPOs, noone to supply the market with any modules but the normal T1 ones sold by the NPCs? Forcing the players to start over? The first thing we'll likely see is people ninja mining in frigates in 0.0 for months, until the economy gets rolling. That might take a while. No matter how I look at it, I'd stay with Tranquility. (Which now, as CCP now has to support two consistant game worlds, has less hardware to support it and thus even worse lag? No thanks.)
The Chinese server is a notable exception. The Chinese gaming culture is different, and due to the large amounts of Chinese Online gamers, CCP predicts that, after the Chinese launch, 70% of the players would be Chinese assuming a mediocre success. Only a fraction of the Chinese population speaks English, and even fewer speak it well. Doing that without sharding would practically kill the game for all other players. Besides I don't want to see the lag when 40k players try to connect from China to the server located in London. That's why I think that taking Serenity as an example for 'sharding already being done for China' is a rather pointless reason for splitting up Tranquility.
...
Do I get a cookie for posting a constructive and more than one line answer?
my thoughts exactly. making a new shard would force that shard to completely rebuild what we have reached in EVE... players will be stuck in frigates and cruisers for the first 6 months, let alone building POSses, alliances, BS, Capital ships, outposts, etc...
and splitting the community we got now would be a real problem: who'd get to stay, and who wouldn't? only option then is to only allow new players on the new shard.
now imagine being the first player on an empty shard.... I hardly imagine eve being fun in singleplayer mode, so the new people would have a tendancy to immediantly cancel their subscription, causing severe startup problems with the new shard.
|
Wahlander
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 01:34:00 -
[132]
Well, I kinda like the way the universe in EVE gets more populated for each day. It's a cool feeling that there are tens of thousands of other players out there flying around with me! If you put a limit at let's say 10000 players, then EVE would lose it's charm.. The more the merrier!
|
NATMav
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 01:35:00 -
[133]
The main problem is players per node. The trade hubs always lag because there are more players than the node can handle. Large fleet battles lag because you're cramming 200-300 players into a node that normally handles 50 or less, and thus has less resources allocated to it.
Sharding would do very little to fix those problems. You'd just be taking the current nodes, dividing them in half, and having the same load balancing problems on each shard when one node of that shard gets overloaded with players.
The only long term solution is to add more processing power per node, along with more nodes to further divide that power, which is what they plan to do. .
|
Wizie
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 01:36:00 -
[134]
NO
|
Anders Wahlander
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 01:40:00 -
[135]
Originally by: Arthalion Thoidon
Originally by: Balban Cain No Nein Geen npo ingen
well i think you get the point
That sums up my other post, just one thing, the dutch for no is nee, not geen. geen = none.
"No" in Swedish = "Nej" "Ingen" = Nobody, noone.
|
HDCamper Itsim
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 01:47:00 -
[136]
$%^@%^@%&$$^*#%^* NO.
|
Khonsu
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 01:54:00 -
[137]
答えは否である La respuesta es no 答复是没有 응답은 아니오 이다 Svaret er nei Η απάντηση είναι αριθ A resposta T No La rTponse est non Ответом будет нет 答復是沒有 La risposta F no Svaret Sr nej الجوابة رفض
|
OF PitViper
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 02:04:00 -
[138]
My fortune cookie says NO
|
Kage Getsu
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 02:05:00 -
[139]
いいえ。
|
CaptianBlack
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 03:05:00 -
[140]
our survey says.............. NO
|
|
vecdran
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 03:06:00 -
[141]
No. Horrible idea.
|
Manasseh San'Shapur
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 03:07:00 -
[142]
Edited by: Manasseh San''Shapur on 19/12/2005 03:14:24 Sorja, are you suggesting that the ONLY way to fix lag is sharding??? Even CCP don't think this, they think Yaaardwaaare!!!
They've got more balls & ingenuity than all the other generic, substandard, corporate mmog's outthere. Name me any sharded MMOG that doesnt have lag?
The success of the game and its constant growth is testament to the greatness and uniqueness of EvE.
Don't be so narrowminded, think outside the box. In ths life there are the pioneers, and then there's everyone else who wished they'd thought of it first.
And emphatic NO to sharding EvE
Defending Gods Truth for Amarr and Empire! |
Khonsu
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 03:12:00 -
[143]
Even if they shard (ALLAH FORBID!), they still need to buy new hardware... so why not just use this new hardware for the existing server
|
Happysin
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 03:19:00 -
[144]
The short answer: No
the long answer: Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
|
Solan
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 03:22:00 -
[145]
After the words opposite and day are combined everything here in out for the rest of the day shall be the opposite of what is said.
Ready...Set...OppositeDay...
We should totally shard! It would help the game out so much! DO it Do it!!! I would buy 400 more accounts!!!
-Solan
P.S. I apologize for the fact that this post was a waste of your time. I couldn't resist since this thread had wasted my time. I think I am now dumber from actually opening it up.
|
Sorja
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 03:26:00 -
[146]
Originally by: Manasseh San'Shapur Sorja, are you suggesting that the ONLY way to fix lag is sharding???
Did I? I think not
If CCP can manage to solve all issues, more power to everybody, the 'shardless' concept is appealing and should be preserved as long as possible.
The reason why I brought up the idea (that is not really new, mind you) is that before RMR it was not possible to have fleet battles in decent conditions, and that we seem to be in for more nightmares before things settle down, if ever. While, on the other hand, many point at how fleet battles were smooth in the past, when there were much less players online at a same time.
Heh, it's only an idea up for discussion, there's little point being upset about it, while I can understand the bitter remarks of my former alliance 'friends'
|
Cabadrin
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 03:27:00 -
[147]
No. ________________________________________________
Eve-Online Blog |
Jenny Spitfire
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 03:29:00 -
[148]
Edited by: Jenny Spitfire on 19/12/2005 03:32:17 Sorja, has it ever occur to you that we are already being sharded by systems? 1 server can have either 1 system or a group of systems. The lag is because the server can not cope with overloading systems.
1000+ systems in EvE is about 10-20 systems/processes per server, which brings about 100 to 150 servers in EvE cluster (guess here because I dont know too much about EvE cluster).
If you want a WoW type of sharding and if it is a must, I am sure CCP will use 1000 servers to cater for 1000 systems even though 50% of the systems are unoccupied, which means that 500 servers are idling doing nothing much than running "screen savers". We are being sharded in the background but as long as your short-sighted eyes can see, we are all in 1 EvE cluster.
So, stop this thing about sharding because we *are already* being sharded. ----------------
RecruitMe@NOINT! |
xecutey
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 03:38:00 -
[149]
Edited by: xecutey on 19/12/2005 03:41:35 Edited by: xecutey on 19/12/2005 03:38:53 without a shadow of a doubt NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
However, what i can't understand is why each system can't be held on there own server.
With EMPIRE space using bigger servers than the less populated sections of space.
i mean entering a jump gate is kinda like entering a new area/dungeon etc type scenario.
so just put each reagion on there own servers and adjust there capacity due size.. due to that regions demmands at that time!
then when jumping regions we jump between servers, i am sure communication between friends in different regions (and so servers) can be got around due to the DB on the central server machine.
I aint no computer techy so what i am proposing maybe not viable or makes no sense at all. However i am sure other online games use different servers for different areas of the game rather than one huge array for all.
|
BlakJak Corington
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 03:41:00 -
[150]
Edited by: BlakJak Corington on 19/12/2005 03:44:36 not suprised a post like this coming from a toon in a french alliance, seems the french historicaly, well i wont go there freedom fries 4tw!!!! p.s. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |