Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

EI Digin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
1376
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 17:15:00 -
[1] - Quote
If you ask any hardened veteran who was around a long time ago, they will tell you that big fights were generally Not Fun because of all the disconnects, black-screening, etc. Time Dilation did a lot to fix this and made big fights a lot more bearable.
The question is, even with this why is it that nearly all fights over timers these days cause node crashes, are slowed down to their maximum TiDi percentage and are generally not a good time? Why are we headed back to the old days of lag and unplayability?
Today's meta-game has shifted towards having the biggest bloc, as weaker blocs have died out. The majority of member corps of these blocs did not go and stake their own claim. They didn't reform into a new power bloc. They just simply joined one of the existing larger blocs, because straight up fights are what most people find fun, not backroom deals or dealing with logistics which are huge investments of effort that having your own bloc requires. This results in the three gigantic sov blocs we have now.
The problem with having these gigantic blocs is that suddenly instead of the 500 to 1000 man fleet fights which were huge back in the day and can easily be handled by TiDi, now every single fight over an objective is a 2000 man slugfest.
The secondary problem with this is that this gigantic fight can kick off pretty much anywhere where you can expect any one fleet to pass through. If your fleet takes gates, CCP would have to reinforce all systems en route to make sure one fleet of 250 can pass through without getting jumped and the fight escalating. All midpoints have to be reinforced. All staging systems have to be perma-reinforced. Any small objective turns into a big one, and suddenly every single timer system has to be reinforced, which can be a problem if a large number of timers are generated.
There's no way you would be able to reinforce all of these systems so that they can handle a gigantic fight. The players can't always deliver intel to you on time for downtime, and you shouldn't throw your hands up in the air and blame us for a broken system which promotes a metagame that causes heavy amounts of lag.
This has been a slowly escalating issue since 2011. TiDi was a good bandaid solution for CCP to buy time and allow them to improve upon nullsec and the sov system to make it less bloc-centric before we got here.
But again we see ourselves at the breaking point, where players are feeling the side effects of CCP failing to make any effective systematic change to a real issue, and even with the attempted fixes that have occurred there is no end in sight. Even the arguably greatest addition you have made, the introduction of TiDi, has become ineffective due to a system that is not working properly.
All of the effort put into quality-of-life changes is much appreciated, but at the end of the day these changes don't matter if you're stuck in slow motion for 3 hours longer than you wanted to play for. |

Batelle
Komm susser Tod
478
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 17:27:00 -
[2] - Quote
Well reasoned. It may be a bitter pill to swallow, but I think there are things CCP could do to shake up the null metagame besides merely ship re-balancing. I'm kind of concerned that stargates will incentivize blocs more than ever. "CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"
Never forget. |

James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
6339
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 17:27:00 -
[3] - Quote
I find it amusing when people describe fights before TiDi and it sounds exactly like my experience now. EVE Online - A Rigged Game |

Katrina Oniseki
Revenent Defence Corperation Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
2428
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 17:28:00 -
[4] - Quote
Finally a good post.
The problem is the way the players are playing the game, because that is what the game rewards most. Ch+½j+ì Katrina Oniseki ~ (RDC) Chief Operations Officer ~ [I-RED] Director of Public Relations |

Steve Spooner
Mordu's Military Industrial Command SpaceMonkey's Alliance
140
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 18:14:00 -
[5] - Quote
Assign drones--->watch Netflix. One of the many reasons that drone assist is so good and great is that it only takes the attention of a single person to concentrate an entire fleets drone power. Only one person has to pull the trigger so only he has to deal with tidi. The rest of the populace can alt tab, watch their shows, or deal with waifu agro. |

Gorn Arming
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
343
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 18:15:00 -
[6] - Quote
Multithread it. I don't care how many expansions it takes; it has to be done. |

Azami Nevinyrall
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
1368
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 18:21:00 -
[7] - Quote
TiDi is a great idea....if applied with back-end code fixes...
One day CCP will learn...the hard way...that they should've fixed the actual problem instead of applying a bandaid and hope things hold until the next one is applied...
Next bandaid....brain-in-the-box!!! Support my (possibly dumb) Ideas!! Worm Rebalance!!! |

Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
25
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 18:29:00 -
[8] - Quote
The reason why this is a problem is because 90% of the people are spineless clowns who would rather hide in numbers than actually have some backbone and self respect, they're grind bears. Don't blame EVE or CCP for the massive ****** coalitions. |

Kharamete
Feral Solutions Inc
79
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 18:30:00 -
[9] - Quote
Pre-Tidi a big fight was 1200 people in local. Pre-tidi that crashed the node.
Current situation is 1500-4000 in local with extreme tidi plus possible node-crash.
It's always been thus. When CCP increase the capacity of a system, the player base crash the capacity with more people.
If in four years time CCP triples or quadruples the capacity, players will pile in five or six times as many.
--- CCP FoxFour:-á"... the what button... oh god I didn't even know that existed. BRB." |

James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
6340
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 18:42:00 -
[10] - Quote
Kharamete wrote:Pre-Tidi a big fight was 1200 people in local. Pre-tidi that crashed the node.
Current situation is 1500-4000 in local with extreme tidi plus possible node-crash.
It's always been thus. When CCP increase the capacity of a system, the player base crash the capacity with more people.
If in four years time CCP triples or quadruples the capacity, players will pile in five or six times as many.
You don't know what you're talking about. But that's hardly surprising. EVE Online - A Rigged Game |
|

EI Digin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
1380
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 18:53:00 -
[11] - Quote
Don't get me wrong.
I accept that there are engineering challenges getting thousands of players together playing the same game and interacting with eachother. I also accept that there should also be large battles that happen on occasion when something very important is on the line.
But when they become a regular occurrence someone needs to step back and figure out why it keeps happening and do something to make strategies that don't involve generating an insane amount of processing power more effective. |

Serptimis
Balls Deep Inc.
262
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 18:57:00 -
[12] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:I find it amusing when people describe fights before TiDi and it sounds exactly like my experience now. Modules not activating , lag, black screens and logging back in to find you've been podded. all the things TiDi was supposed to have 'solved'
Katrina Oniseki wrote:Finally a good post.
The problem is the way the players are playing the game, because that is what the game rewards most. How do you design an MMO that doesn't facilitate players working together? |

Beekeeper Bob
Beekeepers Anonymous
800
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 19:08:00 -
[13] - Quote
Kharamete wrote:Pre-Tidi a big fight was 1200 people in local. Pre-tidi that crashed the node.
Current situation is 1500-4000 in local with extreme tidi plus possible node-crash.
It's always been thus. When CCP increase the capacity of a system, the player base crash the capacity with more people.
If in four years time CCP triples or quadruples the capacity, players will pile in five or six times as many.
Been in 0.0 lately? Try undocking 100 people at the same time, massive tidi, something that didn't used to be a problem. Run 100 man gang thru some gates to a fight and watch the tidi build with each jump. CCP decided that Tidi was "good enough" and started working on the graphics. The problem with that is, shiny pictures require more time to generate. Jita used to handle 2700, they lowered it to 2k, same reason.
Tidi is also not the great balancer that CCP would have you believe either. I had two alts in that Black legion Super welp, the one in a Dread could not cycle the siege module for the entire fight. My other character in a subcap ran slow, but all the modules actually cycled, at the expected time based on the tidi.
Tidi is a temporary fix, the problem is, at the pace CCP works, that could be years before they come up with something better.
In order to be involved with Sov warfare now, you must have no life, because any fight could turn into a 10 hour yawn fest
CCP, trading shiny pictures for playability since 2003.. EvE, a cutting edge game. The only game to provide Matrix style gameplay for the masses! (trouble is, most people don't have 9 hours to waste on a one hour fight.) |

James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
6342
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 19:13:00 -
[14] - Quote
The ironic thing is, tidi actually gives alliances time to pile more people onto a fight before it's over. EVE Online - A Rigged Game |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
8697
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 19:23:00 -
[15] - Quote
Problem isn't tidi, Its the drone clouds.
Beehive domi were nerfed for this very reason all those years ago. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
1506
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 19:24:00 -
[16] - Quote
Remember back in 2010 when ccp grayscale said there were looking into fix null sec...
Yeah so its almost 4 years later... any updates? There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... Winter Expansion new ship request |

MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
1506
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 19:25:00 -
[17] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Problem isn't tidi, Its the drone clouds.
Beehive domi were nerfed for this very reason all those years ago.
Make it so you can only asign drones to a squad member. That should help There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... Winter Expansion new ship request |

James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
6344
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 19:29:00 -
[18] - Quote
Drone assist is broken, but it's not the cause of the problem. EVE Online - A Rigged Game |

MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
1506
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 19:36:00 -
[19] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Drone assist is broken, but it's not the cause of the problem.
Perhaps but 4000 drones cant help one would think. There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... Winter Expansion new ship request |

octahexx Charante
Corporate Scum Northern Associates.
78
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 19:42:00 -
[20] - Quote
tidi havent solved anything. unless you consider watchign ata stillframe frozen for 4hours better then a blackscreen.
If you actually consider that progress and fun i feel sorry for you. |
|

Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
1536
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 19:43:00 -
[21] - Quote
Right now, I am in a high sec system, at least 4 jumps from low sec, let alone null. And we have Tidi at 77%, (was 87% a moment ago) with 33 people in local.
Yeah, this TiDi thing is working great. Most people viewed Orwell's writings as a warning. The harper regime and the goons treat them as a guidebook. |

Jythier Smith
WATERSHIP HOLDINGS Harmonic Convergence
165
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 19:44:00 -
[22] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Drone assist is broken, but it's not the cause of the problem. Perhaps but 4000 drones cant help one would think.
Unless they're 4000 programer drones. |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
8697
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 19:56:00 -
[23] - Quote
octahexx Charante wrote:tidi havent solved anything. unless you consider watchign ata stillframe frozen for 4hours better then a blackscreen.
If you actually consider that progress and fun i feel sorry for you.
After what I used to go through I'll take TiDi and be happy. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
8697
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 19:57:00 -
[24] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:Right now, I am in a high sec system, at least 4 jumps from low sec, let alone null. And we have Tidi at 77%, (was 87% a moment ago) with 33 people in local.
Yeah, this TiDi thing is working great.
nodes have more than one system on them. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

EI Digin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
1383
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 20:11:00 -
[25] - Quote
Jita is another interesting case.
Because there's such low risk hanging out with the most dangerous and unpredictable entity (other players) while in highsec, people will flock together in a centralized location to do trade. There's little point in doing business other hubs because for the most part, things are most efficient and cheaper in the same singular location.
The result is a single system for trade that has a huge hardware requirement with player limits and TiDi. |

Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
1162
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 21:24:00 -
[26] - Quote
Root of the problem ....
1) No friendly fire ... guns fire through friendly ships, how nice. 2) No AoE damage from exploding ships.
You design a game for the mindless blob, you naturally get a mindless blob in return. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |

Prince Kobol
1180
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 22:29:00 -
[27] - Quote
I absolutely hate being involved large scale fights now.
I simply do not have the time to sit there for hours and hours on end and knowing that nothing will be accomplished because there is a very good chance the node will crash.
So question is what is the point?
I do not blame any alliance for wanting to bring more people to a fight.
The point of any engagement is to win and it is usually those who have more numbers that do win.
The fact is CCP has needed to do something with Sov Warfare Mechanics and have totally ignored it.
The entire nature of Sov Warfare means you need large numbers to grind structures which in turns means large fleets.
The problem will only get worse as alliances / coalitions grow in size and are able to bring more people to any given fight. |

Jessica Danikov
Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension
139
|
Posted - 2013.11.24 18:14:00 -
[28] - Quote
Honestly, I think it's a failure for nullblocs to innovate their strategy, which is partially the fault of sov mechanics (it's difficult to create a situation where it's advantageous to be in more than one place) and partially the fault of nullblocs blindly barging through their problems one timer at a time with as many numbers as possible. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
17507
|
Posted - 2013.11.24 18:20:00 -
[29] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:Right now, I am in a high sec system, at least 4 jumps from low sec, let alone null. And we have Tidi at 77%, (was 87% a moment ago) with 33 people in local. GǪand what does the distance to null or low have to do with anything? How do you determine how many people are on the node with you?
Quote:Yeah, this TiDi thing is working great. It sure is. Or were you just being erroneously sarcastic based on not really understanding how the server is set up or how TiDi works? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |

Iria Ahrens
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
96
|
Posted - 2013.11.24 18:32:00 -
[30] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:Root of the problem ....
1) No friendly fire ... guns fire through friendly ships, how nice. 2) No AoE damage from exploding ships.
You design a game for the mindless blob, you naturally get a mindless blob in return.
AoE damage from exploding ships is good. The friendly fire thing... not so.
The thing is, Space is big. Really really big. Positioning ships so they aren't in the line of fire would be easy if eve were real. It is the game interface that makes ships clusterfisk the way they do in game. Because you disdained all my counsel, and my reproof you ignoredGÇö I, in my turn, will laugh at your doom; will mock when terror overtakes you; -- Ultimate Griefer's Handbook |
|

Antihrist Pripravnik
Paravan Korporacija
135
|
Posted - 2013.11.24 18:47:00 -
[31] - Quote
Serptimis wrote:Katrina Oniseki wrote:Finally a good post.
The problem is the way the players are playing the game, because that is what the game rewards most. How do you design an MMO that doesn't facilitate players working together?
By providing multiple objectives scattered around attacked space that have to be dealt with at the same time you don't need to prevent players from woking together. Current political map allows this to happen as we live in the era of power blocks. Leave massive fights for main objectives (stations, for example), but have a way of contesting space that would require engagement spread through multiple systems at the same time. That way we will still have massive collaboration, huge numbers involved, open possibility for coalitions and still have a potential solution to regular 3 FPS fights. CCP Ytterbium: Yarrblblbgrlblbgrlblblblbblbgrlblblbgrblblyarrrrdrooooooolonthekeyboardlikealunatic     |

Suicidal Blonde
Alchemical Aquisitions
56
|
Posted - 2013.11.24 18:55:00 -
[32] - Quote
I like the idea of discouraging blobs with aoe explosion and line of sight issues. could even add a skill called something like 'fleet formation mastery ' that organises your fleet into coherent firing positions. |

Diamond Zerg
The Scope Gallente Federation
10
|
Posted - 2013.11.24 22:28:00 -
[33] - Quote
+1 OP, I like this thread. |

EI Digin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
1387
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 04:37:00 -
[34] - Quote
I don't think line of sight will ever be a thing because there's already quite a bit of calculation going on that the server can't handle. |

Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
4337
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 06:25:00 -
[35] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:I don't think line of sight will ever be a thing because there's already quite a bit of calculation going on that the server can't handle.
I think LOS should be a thing because it adds so much to the tactical possibilities. I'm sure nVidia or someone in the graphics hardware domain has a piece of ray-tracing hardware which would make LOS calculations trivially easy to do in parallel on the same motherboard as the processor managing the combat simulation. It might even be possible to offload hit/miss and effective damage calculations to such a piece of hardware. Then all the simulator would be responsible for is physics and marshalling inputs and outputs. Then some of that could be offloaded, since vector processing belongs on a maths unit GǪ and all that's left is marshalling data and keeping track of time. Of course that's the paper-napkin plan from the person whose crowning achievement to date has been porting apps from badly written PHP to badly written Django 
Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |

masternerdguy
Inner Shadow C.L.O.N.E.
1373
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 07:08:00 -
[36] - Quote
Enemy has a bigger blob than you?
Friendship is magic. Things are only impossible until they are not. |

Mira Skyloafer
Tymast Industries 150th Brothers of Tangra
0
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 07:15:00 -
[37] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:EI Digin wrote:I don't think line of sight will ever be a thing because there's already quite a bit of calculation going on that the server can't handle. I think LOS should be a thing because it adds so much to the tactical possibilities. I'm sure nVidia or someone in the graphics hardware domain has a piece of ray-tracing hardware which would make LOS calculations trivially easy to do in parallel on the same motherboard as the processor managing the combat simulation. It might even be possible to offload hit/miss and effective damage calculations to such a piece of hardware. Then all the simulator would be responsible for is physics and marshalling inputs and outputs. Then some of that could be offloaded, since vector processing belongs on a maths unit GǪ and all that's left is marshalling data and keeping track of time. Of course that's the paper-napkin plan from the person whose crowning achievement to date has been porting apps from badly written PHP to badly written Django 
It would be better to offload the physics to a discrete graphics processor instead of the hit/miss calculations, as they are both better at those respective tasks. But that's beside the point.
The problem with line of site is that all the server knows (for the purpose of this discussion) is your position and velocity, and that you are firing at a target. It could make an educated guess as to whether you hit a friendly based on their position, but it couldn't know their bounding box accurately. All the graphics stuff is handled on your computer based on info sent from the server. There is no ray tracing happening on the server. It would also have to make this calculation for everyone on grid each time anyone fires. That's a lot of extra server load.
AOE from exploding ships would be easier because it would work just like a missile explosion calculations. However, if you want TiDi to go away, you need solutions that require less server load and not more. |

SmilingVagrant
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2135
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 07:20:00 -
[38] - Quote
This isn't going to be not garbage until they figure out how to utilize multiple cores for node processing. |

Sakaron Hefdover
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
27
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 09:14:00 -
[39] - Quote
Removing drone models altogether might help. I don't remember anyone that liked drone models.
I also think there should be more AOE in the game, and along with that, have formations that people warp into on grid.
EDIT: I reckon it would be very well received |

Suicidal Blonde
Alchemical Aquisitions
59
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 09:20:00 -
[40] - Quote
The issue with bounding boxescould be solved by using sig radii. afaik eve considers all ships spheres. if their sphere is between the two targets damage happens to them. missiles might be problematic. I realise im probably grossly simplifying the task. |
|

Anthar Thebess
REPUBLIKA ORLA C0VEN
157
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 09:36:00 -
[41] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:If you ask any hardened veteran who was around a long time ago, they will tell you that big fights were generally Not Fun because of all the disconnects, black-screening, etc. Time Dilation did a lot to fix this and made big fights a lot more bearable.
The question is, even with this why is it that nearly all fights over timers these days cause node crashes, are slowed down to their maximum TiDi percentage and are generally not a good time? Why are we headed back to the old days of lag and unplayability?
Today's meta-game has shifted towards having the biggest bloc, as weaker blocs have died out. The majority of member corps of these blocs did not go and stake their own claim. They didn't reform into a new power bloc. They just simply joined one of the existing larger blocs, because straight up fights are what most people find fun, not backroom deals or dealing with logistics which are huge investments of effort that having your own bloc requires. This results in the three gigantic sov blocs we have now.
The problem with having these gigantic blocs is that suddenly instead of the 500 to 1000 man fleet fights which were huge back in the day and can easily be handled by TiDi, now every single fight over an objective is a 2000 man slugfest.
The secondary problem with this is that this gigantic fight can kick off pretty much anywhere where you can expect any one fleet to pass through. If your fleet takes gates, CCP would have to reinforce all systems en route to make sure one fleet of 250 can pass through without getting jumped and the fight escalating. All midpoints have to be reinforced. All staging systems have to be perma-reinforced. Any small objective turns into a big one, and suddenly every single timer system has to be reinforced, which can be a problem if a large number of timers are generated.
There's no way you would be able to reinforce all of these systems so that they can handle a gigantic fight. The players can't always deliver intel to you on time for downtime, and you shouldn't throw your hands up in the air and blame us for a broken system which promotes a metagame that causes heavy amounts of lag.
This has been a slowly escalating issue since 2011. TiDi was a good bandaid solution for CCP to buy time and allow them to improve upon nullsec and the sov system to make it less bloc-centric before we got here.
But again we see ourselves at the breaking point, where players are feeling the side effects of CCP failing to make any effective systematic change to a real issue, and even with the attempted fixes that have occurred there is no end in sight. Even the arguably greatest addition you have made, the introduction of TiDi, has become ineffective due to a system that is not working properly.
All of the effort put into quality-of-life changes is much appreciated, but at the end of the day these changes don't matter if you're stuck in slow motion for 3 hours longer than you wanted to play for.
When you where bloobing others this was not the issue - but now when you are getting slaughtered you finally notice it?
I agree TIDI is issue - the biggest is that fights escalate to multi-hour nightmare. I know that CCP Capped the TIDI at 10% - but that was only the timer. Guns on rokh cycling for 7minutes - yes this is TIDI 10%...
|

Dangirdas Bachir
Monstrosity Inc
512
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 09:39:00 -
[42] - Quote
sry im nob, but what does TIDI mean? EVE EVE STARGALACTIC CITY B I T C H |

Pak Narhoo
Splinter Foundation
1198
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 10:04:00 -
[43] - Quote
http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/introducing-time-dilation-tidi/
http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/3412 |

Anthar Thebess
REPUBLIKA ORLA C0VEN
157
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 10:05:00 -
[44] - Quote
In theory - during a heavy battle time slows down to 10%. 10h in TIDI = 1h outside it ( in theory ) CCP did this to manage incoming server load , and some people are stating - to allow more people to get fun. The more is going on in system - the bigger TIDI.
Now the real facts. There is a counter showing current TIDI , and CCP capped it (not the TIDI itself) on 10% - it wont show less. The more players/drones on field - the bigger TIDI. You can get to fight quickly by titan bridge from the area outside TIDI. You can easily crash node by dropping carriers/supers and launching drones/fighters ( PL loves to do it in order to save their ass...ets).
What is happening in TIDI: - Commands you give to your ship subsystems become unresponsive. For example: * you click fire/warp - and the ship responds/or not few! minutes later. * you can fire/target something that is long dead * eve is white screening often * the longest railgun cycle i observed was about 7minutes.
- if your ship dies sometimes ( i got this twice ) it is not removing modules from your pod :) - yes this is quite funny - i was shooting from my pod using 425mm railguns - and doing damage!
- if your pod dies it is good chance you will not loose your implants ( more than once i managed to keep mine)
- you see that people are targeting you - brodcast - and then you hear from logies - but you are long dead. ( what? im 100% shields)
Funny things about TIDI: - you can take your dog into the walk - and nobody notice it - nothing will change on the battlefield - you can logout ( with aggro ) in the middle of the fight , in the baubles - and login in the morning - and join the fight again - TIDI is so big that 40minutes in battle have passed. ( yep did this - and was surprised when i logged back, in the baubles , alive)
Main fact. You cannot run once in TIDI - you can sit there till end of this nightmare , or die. On most important timers TIDI fight continues until a node crash - as anybody can join the fight, at any time.
|

Khamelean
The Southern Legion The Umbra Combine
558
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 13:06:00 -
[45] - Quote
Adding line of sight mechanics or even aoe would increase the load on the server exponentially.
TiDi was never meant to be a fix, all it was ever meant to do is provide graceful degradation of a node. Because of TiDi, nodes have higher capacities than they used to. Because nodes have higher capacities, more players join the fight. If CCP increase the capacity of nodes then battles will just get bigger and the resulting experience will be the same degraded performance.
The fact is that it's very difficult to manage thousands of clients interacting with each other in real time. If anyone can name any system/service out there that can handle that kind of load gracefully, then I would love to hear about it.
Of course that's not to say that CCP shouldn't be constantly trying to improve server performance, or that the players shouldn't continue to demand better server performance. But that doesn't change the fact that it's a hard problem to solve.
|

Justin C4se
The Foundation for Law and Government.
1
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 14:05:00 -
[46] - Quote
TiDI has to be fixed asap... Nodes have crashed 2 or 3 times in this N3 vs RUS war alone!
Plz CCP!!!!!! :::PODLUCK:::-áSlot Machines; Instant Win Scratch Cards;-áFlashes;-áPrice Bombs. (15mil isk for free on signup)
Click it Ingame: ::: EveTools.Org ::: |

Reiisha
Evolution
407
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 14:06:00 -
[47] - Quote
The problem here is blob warfare, not tidi.
Sov and fleet/battle mechanics need to be changed, tidi itself is fine.
If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all... |

tiberiusric
Comply Or Die
47
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 14:14:00 -
[48] - Quote
I have said this time and time again. Tidi is just as bad as it was before. Sure things may hit now, 'eventually' but that could be like 20 mins from the time your first pressed F1, how is that any better? How the hell do you know what you may have hit or may not have 20-30 mins later. You could of died within that 20 mins.
Tidi is a good idea in theory terrible in practice, and as you said its just a bandaid to the problem. In fact its not a bandaid as it doesn't help. I mean you cant even have 200 ships in a system without 20% Tidi
You still get node crashes, and the game in completely unplayable, so how this is better than before, as some people try to make excuses for, i have no idea.
CCP should seriously spend the next expansion on rewriting the code behind all this. But there again you will insist on having everything on one server, wont you players? In fact things may never get better, maybe only worse.
Do you not wonder why every other MMO have lots of shards, simply because there comes a point when lag and server degradation kicks in and no amount of hardware, software tweaking will help. |

Anthar Thebess
REPUBLIKA ORLA C0VEN
157
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 14:15:00 -
[49] - Quote
I suggested long time ago that you have to wait the difference between TIDI/Normal Time - to join the fight. This is 1 timer and it is easily for ccp to manage it without any big load.
For example TIDI is jumping 1-20% and difference between TIDI system rest of eve is 20 minutes. You arrive at the gate to this system/ use JB / Titan etc and you get nice prompt.
"You will have to wait 20min to join this fight." When you click Yes - you get perma cloack and have to wait 20min , or you click no - and go back.
When at some point of battle tidi is gone - timer gets a reset, and all waiting people jump in in perma cloack until they move.
|

Gibbah
Duty. The Cursed Few
16
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 16:07:00 -
[50] - Quote
Even if Ccp would fix it so you could fight a 5000 man fight without lag people would just bring 6000 and still whine about lag. Remove the incentives for blobbing instead. You would get more intressting gameplay for everyone AND no more issues with lag. A win win solution. |
|

Jythier Smith
WATERSHIP HOLDINGS Harmonic Convergence
165
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 16:11:00 -
[51] - Quote
So how do we change the mechanics to go against blob warfare? |

Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
842
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 16:16:00 -
[52] - Quote
Jythier Smith wrote:So how do we change the mechanics to go against blob warfare?
Create several targets that can be hit and disabled by smaller gangs and that are economically or tactically relevant.
Example: Make jump bridges have 200 k EHP. Put Moon mining structures outside pos shield and have 200 k EHP (before the disablign is reached). Remove POS scramblers and warp disruptors (makign easier to a small gang to hit and run).
That type of thing. Woudl add another field to cripple the enemy, withing timed and fast attacs that woudl demans several smaller gagns patrolling,k not a single huge blob to coutner it.
Some will eventually escalate, but now there is real action with strategic relevance that is not made under TIDI.
Billion EHP targets as the only relevant warfare objectives lead to the need of large fleets and long time operations, creatign the oportunity to be counter blobed, what escalates in the need of every operation to be a Huge blob of as large as possible scale.
Give us hit and run, and that will create less field battles. Players will gravitate to the most efficient way of winning the war. Just make possible for other tactics than massive blob to work, and players will use them.
"If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |

tiberiusric
Comply Or Die
48
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 16:47:00 -
[53] - Quote
Gibbah wrote:Even if Ccp would fix it so you could fight a 5000 man fight without lag people would just bring 6000 and still whine about lag. Remove the incentives for blobbing instead. You would get more intressting gameplay for everyone AND no more issues with lag. A win win solution.
The problem is, tidi still happens when there is only a few hundred in system. I don't think nerfing the big battles is the idea, as that pretty much goes against one of eves main attractions (albeit a let down when you actually get in them). However there are now game tactics (and CFC used them and others) to crash the node or make it so unplayable that it no one wanted to even try fighting or even entering a system as tidi was so bad, by just plowing lots of people into the system. That's pretty poor sportsmanship isn't it. Whoever gets into the system first wins type mechanic.
I think CCP need to make nodes based PER REGION rather than here there and everywhere. at the moment you can have a node thats hosting a system in one region ad one in another region far away. So I think that would help. Start looking at some serious code and database optimization as a main release perhaps, then ramp up the hardware.
To be honest, you have to put up your hands to the devs, I mean to be able to develop a game that can handle the mechanics and physics of a 3000+ man battle and all the scenarios that come with it, its pretty impressive nevermind speeding it up. However as i say that, they have done the hard work, the actually physics etc work fine. So how do you speed that up? and that's usually because of hardware or code/database bottlenecks. Perhaps its time as i said to really focus on this issue as a main release. |

Alice Ituin
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
10
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 17:03:00 -
[54] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:I think LOS should be a thing because it adds so much to the tactical possibilities. I'm sure nVidia or someone in the graphics hardware domain has a piece of ray-tracing hardware which would make LOS calculations trivially easy to do in parallel on the same motherboard as the processor managing the combat simulation.
Srsly? CCP haven't even managed to unf** their code to allow multithreading and you expect them to do LOS calculations on a GPU?^^
|

BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
The Scope Gallente Federation
31
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 17:43:00 -
[55] - Quote
Beekeeper Bob wrote:CCP decided that Tidi was "good enough" and started working on the graphics. The problem with that is, shiny pictures require more time to generate.
This is blatantly not true. Shiny pictures require more time for the client to generate. They cause no additional processing time for the server because the server does not render images (if it did you'd have a hard time getting 4 people in a system with 60 fps, let alone 2000). I'd like to see a source for the reasoning behind the jita changes as I was not playing at the time. (started before then, and took a break)
CCP realizes that TiDi is a band-aid solution, and that is why they have a team dedicated to improving performance. It will require significant work to significantly improve the current maximum number of people in a system. If people have suggestions about how to encourage alliances to split fleets between multiple objectives simultaneously, I'd love to hear them, but performance issues are some of the most complex and difficult to solve problems when programming, and complaining about something that they are already working on will do little more than ensure that ccp continues working on these issues (is that a run-on? I'm having trouble writing today for some reason). Keep in mind that these fights that we're talking about have more simultaneous players in combat than most mmo's even have running on one server concurrently.
OP: This is one of the most thought out complaints that I have seen on this subject. Thank you for posting this instead of just saying TiDi sucks like most other threads on the subject do. I hate to disagree with you,-ábut there is nothing subjective about "boring" in connection to "mining". -á-á-á-á -- Solstice Project's Alt |

Frostys Virpio
Lame Corp Name
772
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 17:51:00 -
[56] - Quote
SmilingVagrant wrote:This isn't going to be not garbage until they figure out how to utilize multiple cores for node processing.
They most likely know how but re-writing everything so it can take advantage of multiple core is not a short task. |

Adrian Dixon
Arbitrary Spaceship Destruction The Devil's Warrior Alliance
141
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 18:00:00 -
[57] - Quote
Multi threading must be the real option. In 10 years time do you expect EVE to be a single threading program or a multithreaded .
Personally I think EVE should be a multithreaded program. Someone needs to bite the bullet here. |

Xindi Kraid
The Night Wardens Viro Mors Non Est
615
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 18:22:00 -
[58] - Quote
I don't know what can be done as far as TiDi goes, but I do think, at the very least, it would be beneficial for CCP to come up with a way to allow server assets to be dynamically reassigned with TQ is activae, so that nodes can be reinforced as needed when needed while stuff is happening rather than the devs having to do it manually during downtime.
That said, this is still somewhat of the players' fault. People pile into fleet fights and complain that stuff is slow and the nodes are crashing, so CCP finds a way to increase the limit. More players then pile into fleet fights and, again, end up with lag and node crashes, and somehow this is CCP's fault.
If it's that horrible, then stop taking part in blobreign warfare. |

Baaldor
In Igne Morim Easily Excited
198
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 18:35:00 -
[59] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:If you ask any hardened veteran who was around a long time ago, they will tell you that big fights were generally Not Fun because of all the disconnects, black-screening, etc. Time Dilation did a lot to fix this and made big fights a lot more bearable.
Bearable...this basically. It is now bearable for the rest of us that has experienced the lag monster during Cold War, Red Moon etc etc.
The newer lemmings, this may not be acceptable as they have no refrence except the ramblings from a bunch of burnt out nerds.
Yet they have have not experienced crushing your foe only to have :CCP: roll back the fight and everyone's shiny **** is given back to them, KM's and LM's wiped out....
And being all excited your ship made it....later getting your **** pushed in in the first 30 seconds of the "do over".
Or the entire eve dies for everyone because some one accidentally the whole thing in OOYZ-, Although you are 38 jumps away your **** dies too.
The list goes on...
But wait! there are now benefits to Tidi, less FC burn out, we now have less "FC!! LAG!! I GOT LAG FC!!..." followed by a chorus "lag..lag..lag... fuc!!" from the rest of the special snowflakes you are herding around the universe.
Now we have something very simple "FC..12% Tidi FC, copy Tidi FC?" Much more civilized. And all your special children can now look up to the left had corner...and behold..a meter showing you the fun level... |

Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
1169
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 18:42:00 -
[60] - Quote
Khamelean wrote:Adding line of sight mechanics or even aoe would increase the load on the server exponentially.
You're assuming that fights would ever escalate to the 100+ level with it, which they won't. They could have also made it more difficult to move ships, in particular large ships from system to system but they chose the instant gratification route, so now you have what you have.
The fact that you can have 300 people in a fight is a downright miracle in a multiplayer game, yet people expect thousands. Go figure.
Personally, I'm really happy with TiDi, it lets me know to move to another area and beats the old node crashes when the lemmings tried to fight it out in their boring blob fights. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
|

Starlight Kouvo
The Artisan Collective Confederated States of EVE
7
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 19:02:00 -
[61] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Jythier Smith wrote:So how do we change the mechanics to go against blob warfare? Create several targets that can be hit and disabled by smaller gangs and that are economically or tactically relevant. Example: Make jump bridges have 200 k EHP. Put Moon mining structures outside pos shield and have 200 k EHP (before the disablign is reached). Remove POS scramblers and warp disruptors (makign easier to a small gang to hit and run). That type of thing. Woudl add another field to cripple the enemy, withing timed and fast attacs that woudl demans several smaller gagns patrolling,k not a single huge blob to coutner it. Some will eventually escalate, but now there is real action with strategic relevance that is not made under TIDI. Billion EHP targets as the only relevant warfare objectives lead to the need of large fleets and long time operations, creatign the oportunity to be counter blobed, what escalates in the need of every operation to be a Huge blob of as large as possible scale. Give us hit and run, and that will create less field battles. Players will gravitate to the most efficient way of winning the war. Just make possible for other tactics than massive blob to work, and players will use them.
Now those are the sort of ideas I think CCP should be looking into, make it more about small engagements, say 500 ships a fleet max, strike multiple target systems at the same time allow smaller gang raids to have some effect, put in penalties that apply as the fleets start going over a certain size a leadership negative that shows that over a certain limit C&C becomes a problem and make it a penalty mechanic incentivising not blobbing.
These are some of the things that should be looking into, not just multi-thread the system so we can blob more, yes multi-thread to make it run smoother but create a set of mechanics and tactics that discourage super large fleets. |

Baaldor
In Igne Morim Easily Excited
198
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 19:16:00 -
[62] - Quote
Starlight Kouvo wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:Jythier Smith wrote:So how do we change the mechanics to go against blob warfare? Create several targets that can be hit and disabled by smaller gangs and that are economically or tactically relevant. Example: Make jump bridges have 200 k EHP. Put Moon mining structures outside pos shield and have 200 k EHP (before the disablign is reached). Remove POS scramblers and warp disruptors (makign easier to a small gang to hit and run). That type of thing. Woudl add another field to cripple the enemy, withing timed and fast attacs that woudl demans several smaller gagns patrolling,k not a single huge blob to coutner it. Some will eventually escalate, but now there is real action with strategic relevance that is not made under TIDI. Billion EHP targets as the only relevant warfare objectives lead to the need of large fleets and long time operations, creatign the oportunity to be counter blobed, what escalates in the need of every operation to be a Huge blob of as large as possible scale. Give us hit and run, and that will create less field battles. Players will gravitate to the most efficient way of winning the war. Just make possible for other tactics than massive blob to work, and players will use them. Now those are the sort of ideas I think CCP should be looking into, make it more about small engagements, say 500 ships a fleet max, strike multiple target systems at the same time allow smaller gang raids to have some effect, put in penalties that apply as the fleets start going over a certain size a leadership negative that shows that over a certain limit C&C becomes a problem and make it a penalty mechanic incentivising not blobbing. These are some of the things that should be looking into, not just multi-thread the system so we can blob more, yes multi-thread to make it run smoother but create a set of mechanics and tactics that discourage super large fleets.
Dude, do you know how many peeps you can put in a fleet with FC5? Hint you can not put 500 in a fleet, just saying.
Also, how do you plan to dis-allow folks using Mumble, TS3 or what ever to coordinate these big blob fests? You guys think to linear, and really have no experience out side of dealing with lag in Jita.
|

Asura Vajrarupa
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
6
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 19:35:00 -
[63] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:Root of the problem ....
1) No friendly fire ... guns fire through friendly ships, how nice. 2) No AoE damage from exploding ships.
You design a game for the mindless blob, you naturally get a mindless blob in return.
Someday this lesson will be learned. Or the sun will burn out, which ever comes first. Ignorance is the cause of suffering. |

Crumplecorn
Eve Cluster Explorations
440
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 20:28:00 -
[64] - Quote
Let's see, what we got here.
Suggesting that we fix lag by adding in anti-blob mechanics which exponentially increase the required calculations? Check. Suggesting sharding the server? Check Complaining that TiDi doesn't work just because it too has a limit on what it can handle? Check. The forum's resident DBAs and software engineers telling CCP they how to fix it by reversing the polarity? Check
All in all, a great thread. [img]http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sig.php?r=*rnd*[/img] Desusigs can be seen on the terribad new forums using bbcode enabling script (scroll down to my post for sig rotation) |

handige harrie
Hedion University Amarr Empire
136
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 20:45:00 -
[65] - Quote
Yesterday I was in a fleet of 30 frigates in Lowsec bordering some nullsec systems roaming about, jumping gates gave TiDi, engaging targets gave TiDi. It feels like we're going backwards. Baddest poster ever |

Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog
B.L.U.E L.A.S.E.R.
236
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 20:51:00 -
[66] - Quote
I swear, if you're not underemployed or a part time student, TiDi makes this game unplayable (on the occasions where you have to deal with it).
But again, a low expectations playerbase doesn't just see TiDi as a necessary evil, but talk about how much happier they are with it than without it.
It's like Internet Stockholm Syndrome - why worry about fixing a serious problem when things could be so much worse? Amirite?
CCP is pretty unique in having a single-shard universe, and it's a major feature of EVE; but there is a pretty good reason why all MMOs don't do single shard . . . can you guess why? If you said unplayable lag, you win! And what you win is unplayable nullsec fights due to lag!
If one of EVE's several defining features (massive-scale battles) doesn't work, it needs to be fixed, not bandaged. The repeated node deaths of the previous few months show that things are getting worse, not better, and asinine solutions like removing drones or forcing players to use less ships aren't going to help. This is something that'll require a heavy mix of better hardware and much, much better software, and it would be nice for the Dev's to at least hint that it's something that's not only being actively worked on, but that it's a priority.
EVE is already one of the least-interactive video games out there, adding 8 hour fights (and 2 hour travel times to get to those fights) is pretty sad. But again . . . benefits of a low expectation player base, I guess :P
Or maybe there is some other fix (other than serious, dedicated software overhaul and the addition of some even higher-end hardware) that hasn't been brought up yet. Maybe . . .
1) Subspace Warp Core Interference: when x amounts of supercaps are on the field, the combined interference from their warp drives causes some sort of pulse that straight up kills all drones in the system (electronics are too fragile for it) but leaves bombers intact (hardened electronics) as well as all ships (again, hardened electronics). It would mean that all fights that escalate to supercaps would mean drone boats get the shaft, but I'm sure the meta could adjust accordingly, and smaller fights would be unaffected.
2) Voltron Drone Assist: when a fleet has deployed x amount of drones and assisted them to one ship, the drones interlock into one giant behemoth drone-cannon. Requires a new type of drones that have better tracking/damage/optimal than current T2 drones, making it ideal for fleet fights where certain engagement ranges can (hopefully) be predicted. Instead of 5,000+ drones on the field, you have two giant drones facing off against one another, or one giant drone just murderfacing the opposing fleet unless and until it gets blown apart by opposing battleships/cruisers. Added points if EWAR drones can pull the same trick, and a monster Hornet-god can AoE ECM whole fleets with tear-inducing goodness (might be overkill on that one). I am not an alt of Chribba. |

Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog
B.L.U.E L.A.S.E.R.
236
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 20:52:00 -
[67] - Quote
Crumplecorn wrote:Let's see, what we got here. Suggesting that we fix lag by adding in anti-blob mechanics which exponentially increase the required calculations? Check. Suggesting sharding the server? Check Complaining that TiDi doesn't work just because it too has a limit on what it can handle? Check.The forum's resident DBAs and software engineers telling CCP they how to fix it by reversing the polarity? Check All in all, a great thread.
More sheeple coming in to defend TiDi, 'cause it's the best damn thing to ever happen and the alternative will literally **** our children?
Check.
I am not an alt of Chribba. |

Crumplecorn
Eve Cluster Explorations
441
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 20:58:00 -
[68] - Quote
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog wrote:This is something that'll require a heavy mix of better hardware and much, much better software, and it would be nice for the Dev's to at least hint that it's something that's not only being actively worked on, but that it's a priority. It's a shame that you spent all that time writing that post when all that's there at the core is the single greatest non-solution to scalability issues.
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog wrote:if there are overall way less people engaged in a fight, slightly adding the processing requirements on a per pilot basis is still an overall net gain. Well, adding in new mechanics that would crush the server under the load would certainly reduce the number of people involved in fights, I'll give you that. [img]http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sig.php?r=*rnd*[/img] Desusigs can be seen on the terribad new forums using bbcode enabling script (scroll down to my post for sig rotation) |

Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog
B.L.U.E L.A.S.E.R.
236
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 21:00:00 -
[69] - Quote
Starlight Kouvo wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:Jythier Smith wrote:So how do we change the mechanics to go against blob warfare? Create several targets that can be hit and disabled by smaller gangs and that are economically or tactically relevant. Example: Make jump bridges have 200 k EHP. Put Moon mining structures outside pos shield and have 200 k EHP (before the disablign is reached). Remove POS scramblers and warp disruptors (makign easier to a small gang to hit and run). That type of thing. Woudl add another field to cripple the enemy, withing timed and fast attacs that woudl demans several smaller gagns patrolling,k not a single huge blob to coutner it. Some will eventually escalate, but now there is real action with strategic relevance that is not made under TIDI. Billion EHP targets as the only relevant warfare objectives lead to the need of large fleets and long time operations, creatign the oportunity to be counter blobed, what escalates in the need of every operation to be a Huge blob of as large as possible scale. Give us hit and run, and that will create less field battles. Players will gravitate to the most efficient way of winning the war. Just make possible for other tactics than massive blob to work, and players will use them. Now those are the sort of ideas I think CCP should be looking into, make it more about small engagements, say 500 ships a fleet max, strike multiple target systems at the same time allow smaller gang raids to have some effect, put in penalties that apply as the fleets start going over a certain size a leadership negative that shows that over a certain limit C&C becomes a problem and make it a penalty mechanic incentivising not blobbing. These are some of the things that should be looking into, not just multi-thread the system so we can blob more, yes multi-thread to make it run smoother but create a set of mechanics and tactics that discourage super large fleets.
I just defended the idea behind your post, but here's what you're asking for:
1) a maximum fleet size of 256 pilots ("make it more about small engagements, say 500 ships a fleet max")
2) the ability to reinforce multiple stations in a region at once ("strike multiple target systems at the same time")
3) the ability to bring frigate sized ships with battleship style weapons and AoE attacks to fleet fights ("allow smaller gang raids to have some effect")
4) nerfing off-grid boosting ("put in penalties that apply as the fleets start going over a certain size")
5) introduce Time Dilation ("penalty mechanic incentivising not blobbing")
you want to social engineer a solution to a hardware/software problem; it might be possible, but your attempts at a solution are woefully lacking.
I am not an alt of Chribba. |

Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5238
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 21:07:00 -
[70] - Quote
Clearly mechanics that incentives simple structure shoots and structure reps are the way to go.
Less fighting over the structure and more just shooting or repping it. There are no goons. The goons' 0.0 dream is over.
"Progodlegend said the goal of N3 is to destroy Goonswarm Federation, but in reality NCdot is in Fountain due to the fact it is virtually the last place there is action." ~NC., Fountain 2013 |
|

Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog
B.L.U.E L.A.S.E.R.
236
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 21:11:00 -
[71] - Quote
Crumplecorn wrote:Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog wrote:This is something that'll require a heavy mix of better hardware and much, much better software, and it would be nice for the Dev's to at least hint that it's something that's not only being actively worked on, but that it's a priority. It's a shame that you spent all that time writing that post when all that's there at the core is the single greatest non-solution to scalability issues.
uh . . . . wow. Very wrong.
If this was an infinitely scalable issue, yes . . . but it's not. You must've taken a semester of computer science 101 to have formed such a complete and flawless opinion mate.
Tell me this: right now, would we be discussing all these node crashes/TiDi problems if EVE's code was not ten years old but was instead optimized for technology that existed in, oh, say 2011?
Of course, you'll still say "yes" because you're bound and determined to make this an intractable problem, meaning that best case scenario EVE is already hard capped on population and any further adjustments to the code or hardware would be spitting into the ocean.
Think about how dumb that stance is. Think about those old realm v. realm battles in Dark Age of Camelot, and how even they (as fun as they were) were effectively slideshows due to lag . . .
. . . and then imagine those same fights on today's hardware/software (client and server). Seemless.
I promise you, optimized code and compatible server hardware can run 2000 pilot fights without TiDi. There are software solutions to both optimizing the use of current hardware technologies and for optimizing the way that the EVE client interacts with the server. It appears that you disagree because if we go from 2000 pilot fights to 100,000 pilot fights that is no longer the case, which if you think about it, is a really dumb argument.
But enjoy your TiDi/node crashes at 2000 pilots. I guess we never have to worry about scalability under your plan, because the server is already population hard capped . . .
I am not an alt of Chribba. |

Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog
B.L.U.E L.A.S.E.R.
236
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 21:14:00 -
[72] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Clearly mechanics that incentives simple structure shoots and structure reps are the way to go.
Less fighting over the structure and more just shooting or repping it.
CCP should put all IHUBs/SBUs etc. into something like faction war complexes, restrict the size of ships that can enter to frigates, limit the total number of ships in the deadspace pocket to 2, and only allow one member of the corp that owns the structure to be inside and once.
SOV warfare should be a series of honorable 1 v 1 frigate duals.
I, for one, already welcome our Brave Newbie Overlords.
I am not an alt of Chribba. |

Crumplecorn
Eve Cluster Explorations
441
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 21:19:00 -
[73] - Quote
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog wrote:I promise you, optimized code and compatible server hardware can run 2000 pilot fights without TiDi. There are software solutions to both optimizing the use of current hardware technologies and for optimizing the way that the EVE client interacts with the server. I believe this is number 4 in my checklist.
Bonus points for including a version of "640 kB ought to be enough for anybody" [img]http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sig.php?r=*rnd*[/img] Desusigs can be seen on the terribad new forums using bbcode enabling script (scroll down to my post for sig rotation) |

Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog
B.L.U.E L.A.S.E.R.
236
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 21:35:00 -
[74] - Quote
Crumplecorn wrote:Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog wrote:I promise you, optimized code and compatible server hardware can run 2000 pilot fights without TiDi. There are software solutions to both optimizing the use of current hardware technologies and for optimizing the way that the EVE client interacts with the server. I believe this is number 4 in my checklist. Bonus points for including a version of "640 kB ought to be enough for anybody"
You selectively quote like a pro. I believe this is number one in my heart.
I am not an alt of Chribba. |

Crumplecorn
Eve Cluster Explorations
441
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 21:48:00 -
[75] - Quote
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog wrote:You selectively quote like a pro. I believe this is numb Years of practice, and you should see a doctor about that numbness.
Here's another tidbit: I'm not the one assuming the population is capped by anything. If it was, incremental improvements to server efficiency might be worth it. However, incremental improvements have led us to a situation now for which I made a sig in 2007. It's not the answer. Lag-free fleet fights are not just over that next rise, it's time to go back down the mountain and re-evaluate. [img]http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sig.php?r=*rnd*[/img] Desusigs can be seen on the terribad new forums using bbcode enabling script (scroll down to my post for sig rotation) |

Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog
B.L.U.E L.A.S.E.R.
236
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 22:30:00 -
[76] - Quote
Crumplecorn wrote:Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog wrote:You selectively quote like a pro. I believe this is numb Years of practice, and you should see a doctor about that numbness. Here's another tidbit: I'm not the one assuming the population is capped by anything. If it was, incremental improvements to server efficiency might be worth it. However, incremental improvements have led us to a situation now for which I made a sig in 2007. It's not the answer. Lag-free fleet fights are not just over that next rise, it's time to go back down the mountain and re-evaluate.
The speech-to-text program you're using is very solid, it nailed punctuation and shortened words without losing the context at all. Did you pay for it, or is it free? I've been looking for good dictation software for a while now that doesn't involve a lot of post-dictation editing.
I am not an alt of Chribba. |

Cur Wulff
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.11.26 03:15:00 -
[77] - Quote
with TiDi - great idea - but definatley a band aid solution.
Expand on it CCP!
Like..... Stick in another server rack and link it to re-enforced nodes. The lag is caused by the time it takes for the server to calculate what 2000 people are doing, moving, firing, drones, etc etc. Have those calculations be done purely on this new rack.
So - System A is going to have a 2000+ fleet battle. CCP gets notified of when and where , that node is re-enforced. When a node is re-enforced it links to a box in the new rack. All combat related CPU calculations for that system are calculated on a box that's purely dedicated to doing the thinking. Have it delay or trickle information suchs as kills, deaths, yadda yadda back to the main server so it doesnt bottleneck there.
Forgive me if i'm wrong - but the lag is caused by the server trying to process what everyone is doing at once. So.. if having a few boxes setup so they get linked with a re-enforced system and dedicated to purely handling the numbers should make quite a difference, no?
|

Garandras
Black Aces Against ALL Authorities
63
|
Posted - 2013.11.26 03:19:00 -
[78] - Quote
Cur Wulff wrote:with TiDi - great idea - but definatley a band aid solution.
Expand on it CCP!
So - System A is going to have a 2000+ fleet battle. CCP gets notified of when and where , that node is re-enforced. When a node is re-enforced it links to a box in the new rack. All combat related CPU calculations for that system are calculated on a box that's purely dedicated to doing the thinking. Have it delay or trickle information suchs as kills, deaths, yadda yadda back to the main server so it doesnt bottleneck there.
See there lies the main issue...
CCP doesnt get notified most of the time.. as with the bloc wars you are never sure when the fight will escalate to that point before hand..
you may know you are going to throw 100-200 guys at said structure and the enemy may only bring 1 dude, or they may drop a few hundred..
then you get some more friends to come help..
they get more friends...
so on and so forth.. |

Ivan Krividus
Straightedge and Compass Industrial
26
|
Posted - 2013.11.26 03:22:00 -
[79] - Quote
I seriously don't understand why everyone hates TiDi so much. In any other game so much activity from so many players would render the game completely unplayable. We would rather have a slow-mo battle than a full server crash, but people fail to appreciate how useful TiDi is. I cant stress this enough so i'm going to say it again: if large battles like those in EVE happened in any other game the game would crash, instead of run. The fact that we can even have these kinds of battles or events is truly amazing.
TiDi is not a band-aid solution. Its a CCP-doesnt-have-infinite-money-for-better-servers-and-this-never-happens-in-other-games-so-no-one-knows-a-better-solution solution that we take for granted.
OP is just a fresh wording of "buy better servers CCP!" which is the complaint that gets tossed around far too often. |

Rhes
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
421
|
Posted - 2013.11.26 03:42:00 -
[80] - Quote
Ivan Krividus wrote:I seriously don't understand why everyone hates TiDi so much.
Probably because they never experienced big fleet fights before TiDi was introduced. TiDi is annoying but it's a vast improvement on how things used to be.
|
|

EI Digin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
1392
|
Posted - 2013.11.26 03:54:00 -
[81] - Quote
Ivan Krividus wrote:I seriously don't understand why everyone hates TiDi so much. In any other game so much activity from so many players would render the game completely unplayable. We would rather have a slow-mo battle than a full server crash, but people fail to appreciate how useful TiDi is. I cant stress this enough so i'm going to say it again: if large battles like those in EVE happened in any other game the game would crash, instead of run. The fact that we can even have these kinds of battles or events is truly amazing.
TiDi is not a band-aid solution. Its a CCP-doesnt-have-infinite-money-for-better-servers-and-this-never-happens-in-other-games-so-no-one-knows-a-better-solution solution that we take for granted.
OP is just a fresh wording of "buy better servers CCP!" which is the complaint that gets tossed around far too often. No, you (and to be fair, many other posters in this thread) completely miss the point I am trying to make.
There is a more permanent solution to soul-crushing lag than just throwing processor power and optimization at the problem.
There is a structural issue in the game in that the only way to obtain progress performing specific activities causes a huge processor load in one very small area, resulting in a broken game. TiDi didn't fix the issue, the next incarnation of TiDi won't fix it and purchasing more million dollar supercomputers won't fix it.
CCP had plenty of time to do something about it before the problem crept up again, but instead they chose to do nothing and we are pretty much back to where we started. |

Fredfredbug4
Eve Defence Force Cult of War
1643
|
Posted - 2013.11.26 03:59:00 -
[82] - Quote
Let's face it, the game engine for EVE is over 10 years old now. Yeah they've updated it here and there but it still operates on the same principle, mainly the one second tick system.
The game is being held back by it's current engine. It's doing fine for now and probably will for several more years, but CCP needs to start working on some major overhaul or a new engine altogether or else EVE is going to be in trouble 5 or 6 years down the line. Watch Fred Fred Frederation and stop cryptozoologist! Fight against the brutal genocide of fictional creatures across New Eden! Is that a metaphor? Probably not, but the fru-fru- people will sure love it! |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
799
|
Posted - 2013.11.26 04:00:00 -
[83] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:Ivan Krividus wrote:I seriously don't understand why everyone hates TiDi so much. In any other game so much activity from so many players would render the game completely unplayable. We would rather have a slow-mo battle than a full server crash, but people fail to appreciate how useful TiDi is. I cant stress this enough so i'm going to say it again: if large battles like those in EVE happened in any other game the game would crash, instead of run. The fact that we can even have these kinds of battles or events is truly amazing.
TiDi is not a band-aid solution. Its a CCP-doesnt-have-infinite-money-for-better-servers-and-this-never-happens-in-other-games-so-no-one-knows-a-better-solution solution that we take for granted.
OP is just a fresh wording of "buy better servers CCP!" which is the complaint that gets tossed around far too often. No, you (and to be fair, many other posters in this thread) completely miss the point I am trying to make. There is a more permanent solution to soul-crushing lag than just throwing processor power and optimization at the problem. There is a structural issue in the game in that the only way to obtain progress performing specific activities causes a huge processor load in one very small area, resulting in a broken game. TiDi didn't fix the issue, the next incarnation of TiDi won't fix it and purchasing more million dollar supercomputers won't fix it. CCP had plenty of time to do something about it before the problem crept up again, but instead they chose to do nothing and we are pretty much back to where we started. What is that solution? |

MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
1513
|
Posted - 2013.11.26 04:04:00 -
[84] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:I find it amusing when people describe fights before TiDi and it sounds exactly like my experience now.
how big were fights before Tidi?
How big can they get now?
Unfortunately we need about 200 atoms and a Quantum computer to run a proper fight smoothly. There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... Winter Expansion new ship request |

Techpriest Arcterran
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.11.26 04:05:00 -
[85] - Quote
Sakaron Hefdover wrote:Removing drone models altogether might help. I don't remember anyone that liked drone models.
I also think there should be more AOE in the game, and along with that, have formations that people warp into on grid.
EDIT: I reckon it would be very well received
This game does not need more AoE. This is the mouth breathers attack of choice. Every MMO that has given AoE respectable damage has declined into an AoE spamfest. Targeting 'skill' goes out the window in favor of blindly flinging about area of effect attacks. |

Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5243
|
Posted - 2013.11.26 04:06:00 -
[86] - Quote
AoE DOOMSDAYS There are no goons. The goons' 0.0 dream is over.
"Progodlegend said the goal of N3 is to destroy Goonswarm Federation, but in reality NCdot is in Fountain due to the fact it is virtually the last place there is action." ~NC., Fountain 2013 |

EI Digin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
1392
|
Posted - 2013.11.26 04:09:00 -
[87] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:What is that solution?
To identify the reasons why people start/get involved in these situations and to distribute the load across multiple nodes.
|

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
799
|
Posted - 2013.11.26 04:12:00 -
[88] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:What is that solution? To identify the reasons why people start/get involved in these situations and to distribute the load across multiple nodes. The reasons are pretty simple, because something is there that people want to defend, take or destroy. I don't see any real way around that that couldn't be gamed. |

Xavier Higdon
Wolfbane Hauler Inc
172
|
Posted - 2013.11.26 04:18:00 -
[89] - Quote
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog wrote:I swear, if you're not underemployed or a part time student, TiDi makes this game unplayable (on the occasions where you have to deal with it).
But again, a low expectations playerbase doesn't just see TiDi as a necessary evil, but talk about how much happier they are with it than without it.
It's like Internet Stockholm Syndrome - why worry about fixing a serious problem when things could be so much worse? Amirite?
CCP is pretty unique in having a single-shard universe, and it's a major feature of EVE; but there is a pretty good reason why all MMOs don't do single shard . . . can you guess why? If you said unplayable lag, you win! And what you win is unplayable nullsec fights due to lag!
If one of EVE's several defining features (massive-scale battles) doesn't work, it needs to be fixed, not bandaged. The repeated node deaths of the previous few months show that things are getting worse, not better, and asinine solutions like removing drones or forcing players to use less ships aren't going to help. This is something that'll require a heavy mix of better hardware and much, much better software, and it would be nice for the Dev's to at least hint that it's something that's not only being actively worked on, but that it's a priority.
EVE is already one of the least-interactive video games out there, adding 8 hour fights (and 2 hour travel times to get to those fights) is pretty sad. But again . . . benefits of a low expectation player base, I guess :P
Or maybe there is some other fix (other than serious, dedicated software overhaul and the addition of some even higher-end hardware) that hasn't been brought up yet. Maybe . . .
1) Subspace Warp Core Interference: when x amounts of supercaps are on the field, the combined interference from their warp drives causes some sort of pulse that straight up kills all drones in the system (electronics are too fragile for it) but leaves bombers intact (hardened electronics) as well as all ships (again, hardened electronics). It would mean that all fights that escalate to supercaps would mean drone boats get the shaft, but I'm sure the meta could adjust accordingly, and smaller fights would be unaffected.
2) Voltron Drone Assist: when a fleet has deployed x amount of drones and assisted them to one ship, the drones interlock into one giant behemoth drone-cannon. Requires a new type of drones that have better tracking/damage/optimal than current T2 drones, making it ideal for fleet fights where certain engagement ranges can (hopefully) be predicted. Instead of 5,000+ drones on the field, you have two giant drones facing off against one another, or one giant drone just murderfacing the opposing fleet unless and until it gets blown apart by opposing battleships/cruisers. Added points if EWAR drones can pull the same trick, and a monster Hornet-god can AoE ECM whole fleets with tear-inducing goodness (might be overkill on that one).
I'm so happy that someone has finally found the solution to lag in multiplayer games. I ask that you not share it with anyone other than CCP at first so that we can enjoy the benefits before others. Please make a detailed proposal, complete with the software solutions you have already designed, tested and debugged as well as a list of needed hardware, and send it to CCP. I'm sure they will pay you a handsome fee for having done all of the work for them, and in fact it's likely you'll win a Nobel Prize in physics(for having created the first quantum computer) as well as a Nobel Peace Prize for ending the constant rage on the EvE-O forums. You're going to be a hero to the millions of people that will soon be rushing to EvE to experience lag free gameplay unlike anything ever seen before! A proud member of Wolfbane Hauler Inc. We are currently recruiting pilots of all skill levels. We need both industrial combat specialists. For more information see our ad:-áhttps://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3764273&#post3764273 |

Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
649
|
Posted - 2013.11.26 04:29:00 -
[90] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Problem isn't tidi, Its the drone clouds.
Beehive domi were nerfed for this very reason all those years ago. I agree. Only drone boats should be able to field 3-5 drones, everyone else should be limited to 1-2 drones, with drones buffed to compensate. Would also be nice to add an incentive to using larger drones on a ship, ie. if a battleship could field either 2 medium or 2 small, it would choose the medium for more DPS or the small for better tracking. When the alternate to 2 medium is 4 small, the smalls give better tracking and dps at the same time, while also making one ship count as 5 units as far as the server is concerned.
Solution: drone hardpoints. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. |
|

tiberiusric
Comply Or Die
48
|
Posted - 2013.11.26 13:44:00 -
[91] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:baltec1 wrote:Problem isn't tidi, Its the drone clouds.
Beehive domi were nerfed for this very reason all those years ago. I agree. Only drone boats should be able to field 3-5 drones, everyone else should be limited to 1-2 drones, with drones buffed to compensate. Would also be nice to add an incentive to using larger drones on a ship, ie. if a battleship could field either 2 medium or 2 small, it would choose the medium for more DPS or the small for better tracking. When the alternate to 2 medium is 4 small, the smalls give better tracking and dps at the same time, while also making one ship count as 5 units as far as the server is concerned. Solution: drone hardpoints.
So we nerf the game because the solution cant cope..Hmm not sure i agree with that one...Isnt that going backwards?
|

Anthar Thebess
REPUBLIKA ORLA C0VEN
157
|
Posted - 2013.11.26 14:10:00 -
[92] - Quote
But can you see any simple solution except - don't swarm ?
From what i observed tidi spikes when people begin to shoot - especially when carrier drones shoot ( calculation for each drone probably, delegation, and the fact that they shoot at the same time ). Maybe CCP go into this direction - or provide us with some simplified combat scheme during big fights - simplified scripts for shoots calculation , that will round some of the values, or use previous results.
I know this is bad solution, but it is way better than "we are going to kill ihub - job for 10minutes , see you in 5 hours.
|

Xavier Higdon
Wolfbane Hauler Inc
176
|
Posted - 2013.11.26 16:45:00 -
[93] - Quote
Anthar Thebess wrote:But can you see any simple solution except - don't swarm ?
From what i observed tidi spikes when people begin to shoot - especially when carrier drones shoot ( calculation for each drone probably, delegation, and the fact that they shoot at the same time ). Maybe CCP go into this direction - or provide us with some simplified combat scheme during big fights - simplified scripts for shoots calculation , that will round some of the values, or use previous results.
I know this is bad solution, but it is way better than "we are going to kill ihub - job for 10minutes , see you in 5 hours.
Actually the best solution is to change the Sov mechanic from structure oriented to control oriented, but if CCP were to try to do so the same people would be here crying about CCP making the game unplayable(unplayable being a synonym for effort, strategy and thinking in this case). There is no solution for these folks, they'll complain no matter what happens. A proud member of Wolfbane Hauler Inc. We are currently recruiting pilots of all skill levels. We need both industrial combat specialists. For more information see our ad:-áhttps://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3764273&#post3764273 |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
800
|
Posted - 2013.11.26 20:12:00 -
[94] - Quote
Xavier Higdon wrote:Anthar Thebess wrote:But can you see any simple solution except - don't swarm ?
From what i observed tidi spikes when people begin to shoot - especially when carrier drones shoot ( calculation for each drone probably, delegation, and the fact that they shoot at the same time ). Maybe CCP go into this direction - or provide us with some simplified combat scheme during big fights - simplified scripts for shoots calculation , that will round some of the values, or use previous results.
I know this is bad solution, but it is way better than "we are going to kill ihub - job for 10minutes , see you in 5 hours.
Actually the best solution is to change the Sov mechanic from structure oriented to control oriented, but if CCP were to try to do so the same people would be here crying about CCP making the game unplayable(unplayable being a synonym for effort, strategy and thinking in this case). There is no solution for these folks, they'll complain no matter what happens. Define control oriented please. |

Razzor Death
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
226
|
Posted - 2013.11.26 20:24:00 -
[95] - Quote
drones need to be changed to a gun slot on your ship, and the drones replaced with some kind ammo that gives the same bonuses and it needs to auto assist to targets you are firing on. When the server is trying to deal with 2000 people it should not be doing calculations for x5 each person's worth of drones.
Its a terrible example but I think you get the idea |

Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
4487
|
Posted - 2013.11.27 01:50:00 -
[96] - Quote
Razzor Death wrote:drones need to be changed to a gun slot on your ship, and the drones replaced with some kind ammo that gives the same bonuses and it needs to auto assist to targets you are firing on. When the server is trying to deal with 2000 people it should not be doing calculations for x5 each person's worth of drones.
Its a terrible example but I think you get the idea Are you implying drone assist is the lead cause of heavy TiDi? . |

Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
32
|
Posted - 2013.11.27 02:06:00 -
[97] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:AoE DOOMSDAYS
Make some new ship to use these. They will be very expensive, an alliance might only have two or even three of them.
This sounds like a good idea, what could go wrong. |

James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
6477
|
Posted - 2013.11.27 02:30:00 -
[98] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:I find it amusing when people describe fights before TiDi and it sounds exactly like my experience now. how big were fights before Tidi? How big can they get now? Unfortunately we need about 200 atoms and a Quantum computer to run a proper fight smoothly. There are only a few types of problems that benefit from quantum computation and algorithms. I don't think any of them apply to this situation.
Marlona Sky wrote:Razzor Death wrote:drones need to be changed to a gun slot on your ship, and the drones replaced with some kind ammo that gives the same bonuses and it needs to auto assist to targets you are firing on. When the server is trying to deal with 2000 people it should not be doing calculations for x5 each person's worth of drones.
Its a terrible example but I think you get the idea Are you implying drone assist is the lead cause of heavy TiDi? Are you implying that it doesn't contribute to the problem, at least to some degree? EVE Online - An Unstable Game |

EI Digin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
1471
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 03:18:00 -
[99] - Quote
Hey look, this thread is relevant again! |

Super spikinator
Hegemonous Conscripts
182
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 03:47:00 -
[100] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:Remember back in 2010 when ccp grayscale said there were looking into fix null sec...
Yeah so its almost 4 years later... any updates?
They also said they would fix COSMOS. |
|

Frostys Virpio
Lame Corp Name
792
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 03:58:00 -
[101] - Quote
The entity in each of those fights are just too big. That's where the "problem" spawned and the very reason why it won't go away. The EVE infrastructures was just never designed to handle that kind of numbers. They would probably never admit it but I am pretty sure the designers when drawing the bases of EVE didn't plan for fights to happen between thousands of ships. Super large alliance like GSF were probably not even possible in their wildest dreams and thats not even the worst right now. Instead of fight being fought on a corp/alliance level, they are now done on a coalition level with insanely inflated numbers.
The logistic backbone IRL army have to face is replaced by the server "cap" in EVE. It's the only thing currently limiting how much force you can effectively muster at the same time. Both side of the battle are effectively free to try to send more and more force on this backbone while they do not have to sustain it.
As long as the entity facing each other can bring all the guns at the same place, the bottleneck will always be the server. We obviously can't reduce the size of any of the fighting side. It has gone over the in game implemented system already anyway proving you can't block anything at that point. Adding logistic to make such critical mass of ship night impossible is only most likely something no-one really want to see.
Changing how many people can show up for a fight is a ****** way to fix this but in the end, it's probably the only way to make it work. As long as you enable people to bring as many of their friends as they can, the limit will always be reached.
TLDR : Nerf friends because the server won't handle it anyway...  |

Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
688
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 04:37:00 -
[102] - Quote
Problem with your idea, Frostys: people will abuse the player limit by bringing in a force large enough to reach the limit all at once, blocking out a defense force. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) And bring back the missile Inquisitor!! |

Frostys Virpio
Lame Corp Name
792
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 04:45:00 -
[103] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Problem with your idea, Frostys: people will abuse the player limit by bringing in a force large enough to reach the limit all at once, blocking out a defense force.
You have to find a way to block the pipes, not to make a smaller end point. I am also fully aware it's not a good thing to do for the game to limit who can participate in a battle for the game but I really think the entities in action have outgrown the sandbox we have. |

K'Po
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.12.23 23:30:00 -
[104] - Quote
Anthar Thebess wrote:I suggested long time ago that you have to wait the difference between TIDI/Normal Time - to join the fight. This is 1 timer and it is easily for ccp to manage it without any big load. For example TIDI is jumping 1-20% and difference between TIDI system rest of eve is 20 minutes. You arrive at the gate to this system/ use JB / Titan etc and you get nice prompt. "You will have to wait 20min to join this fight." When you click Yes - you get perma cloack and have to wait 20min , or you click no - and go back. When at some point of battle tidi is gone - timer gets a reset, and all waiting people jump in in perma cloack until they move. Edit: One of other topic how to limit TIDI. People from bloob fights know how things go messy, when sentry drones begin to shoot. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3921265#post3921265
This has been so far the best, non-restrictive solution for the problem!
The problem I have with TIDI from nullsec perspective is: let's say, your titan pilot fails and jumps to a hostile system instead of bridging. Hostiles of course ping and pile up to kill it and system starts to get heavy TIDI. All the pilots warping to the tackled titan start to slow down in real time.
This gives more time to the failed titan's friends to form up in a TIDI free system, maybe even do couple of bridges while the hostiles are still stuck in TIDI warp to the titan. When they finally land to the titan, the titan's friends are already bridging in to rescue the titan, only because it took you forever just to warp to it due TIDI.
Anthar's suggestion would totally eliminate this advantage the people who made the mistake in the first place shouldn't have, just because the hostiles were affected by a crippling game-mechanic. It would also enforce proper planning of troop deployment instead of constantly reshipping from 30 jumps away every time you die, because you can't just rejoin the fight like that. |

EI Digin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
1665
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 18:52:00 -
[105] - Quote
HED-GP anyone? |

knobber Jobbler
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
314
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 19:47:00 -
[106] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:The reason why this is a problem is because 90% of the people are spineless clowns who would rather hide in numbers than actually have some backbone and self respect, they're grind bears. Don't blame EVE or CCP for the massive ****** coalitions.
I bet you believe in eHonour as well don't you. |

Wolf Kruol
Destructive Influence Northern Coalition.
51
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 19:51:00 -
[107] - Quote
Agreed with OP GÇ£If you're very very stupid? How can you possibly realize you're very very stupid?
You have to be relatively intelligent to realize how stupid you really are!GÇ¥ |

Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1466
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 20:29:00 -
[108] - Quote
I think there are a number of ways to limit engagements:
1. Warpdrives create x distance wide field around a ship that affects an attribute. 2 ships within each others fields its something along the lines of 0.00001%, once you start getting to 100 ships it gets to 1.0%, 200 maybe 5% until its reaches max at 90%. These fields interfere with whatever attribute. If you have a situation where 2000 ships are orbiting 1 pos all inside each others fields of like we did in fountain they may be doing 90% less damage, or 90% less cap recharge or something along those lines.
So a fleet turning up with 1000 ships gets a 90% reduction or increase in something bad, while an enemy fleet that only brings 300, gets a 20% reduction. The smaller fleet has an advantage even though they're outnumbered.
2. Another way would be a module that acts similarly to the cap battery, instead of reflecting neuting however it works with hardeners, taking a small percentage of incoming energy from weapons damage, absorbing it and adding to shield resistance. If 10 ships are shooting at the target ship it takes 0.1% of the incoming damage and increases resist by 0.1%, as damage is increased that % rises to a point that its better to split target fire or not add ships than to focus fire and add more ships.
They're just a number of ideas, I'm sure there are plenty and probably better ones too. They need to do something, I can't even log into the game atm lol.
|

Ticondrius
Void Regulation
15
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 22:24:00 -
[109] - Quote
You're all talking about how to raise the performance limit, or artificially push the size of a fleet down. You forget that there are hard set-in-stone laws at work here that no amount of hardware, reinforcing, or whining can fix.
1. Given space, anything that occupies that space, given infinite time, will expand to fill ALL available space. When's the last time you had to uninstall or delete something to install something else on your PC? When's the last time you were stuck in a traffic jam on a road that was barely even used when your parents used to take you to school by that route? If we make it possible to have larger fleets, there will be larger fleets...and larger fleets...and larger fleets...until we're right here again.
2. The one thing that hasn't truly changed in over 10 years is the quantity and VALUE of 0.0 space. Sure, we've got wormholes. We've also got a few regions (drones, dark rise) that've been added over the years. I'm not talking about this. I'm talking about the blatant, stark naked, brutal addition of another 10,000 star systems on the outside of existing 0.0 space. Why? Let me explain...
In the beginning, there was space. A LOT of space. It's no exaggeration that one could fly around for days and encounter no one in 0.0. A newbie could go to HED and happily mine ore and haul it the few jumps back to Agil. How was this possible?
First, density. There simply was not enough of anyone to coalesce into any sort of unit to claim and hold space. Indeed, the early alliances may have been named for the regions they claimed, but the truth was few managed to hold more than 5 or 6 star systems. Many held just the 1 star system. After all, many Alliances then were little bigger than a medium corporation today.
The second cause is futility. Trying to keep neutrals, or even reds, out of an area of space was incredibly hard. Often impossible, and a pointless exercise.
I challenge you, CCP. Add 10,000, or more, new 0.0 star systems outside of our current ring of 0.0. BEFORE you finish this new player-built stargate initiative. The sandbox has become too small, and there is too little of value out in 0.0 to fight for. |

Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
881
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 23:26:00 -
[110] - Quote
they should add "pirate empire space" at the fringes of New Eden, increasing the number of systems available and giving players a new type of space to explore, with a defense different from and less ultimate than CONCORD, with safe passage requiring increasingly greater standings with the resident pirate faction the deeper you go. This could give incentive for carebears to give up empire standings to gain pirate standings, allow new ways to get pirate loyalty points and access pirate faction items, and maybe even offer a step between highsec and lowsec for beginning PVPers and solo explorers who want a bit more danger but not too much. The nullsec alliances sitting between pirate empire and naval empire would be asked to provide trade transportation services across nullsec, and could stand to make money from that, or possibly make money and a reputation by stealing from traders. Then there could be pirate agents in space in destructible ships that would respawn after enough time, so players friendly to the pirate could go there for missions or to defend the NPC, and some might even go there to be defended by the NPC.
Howabout it? Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) And bring back the missile Inquisitor!! |
|

Zappity
Kurved Space
772
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 01:19:00 -
[111] - Quote
I don't see any new mechanics focusing on NPC interaction or control of space. Rubicon and all that...
Player-built gates and new systems could be of some help to sov problems if done right. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec. |

Erufen Rito
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
73
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 01:29:00 -
[112] - Quote
Beekeeper Bob wrote:Kharamete wrote:Pre-Tidi a big fight was 1200 people in local. Pre-tidi that crashed the node.
Current situation is 1500-4000 in local with extreme tidi plus possible node-crash.
It's always been thus. When CCP increase the capacity of a system, the player base crash the capacity with more people.
If in four years time CCP triples or quadruples the capacity, players will pile in five or six times as many.
Been in 0.0 lately? Try undocking 100 people at the same time, massive tidi, something that didn't used to be a problem. Run 100 man gang thru some gates to a fight and watch the tidi build with each jump. CCP decided that Tidi was "good enough" and started working on the graphics. The problem with that is, shiny pictures require more time to generate. Jita used to handle 2700, they lowered it to 2k, same reason. Tidi is also not the great balancer that CCP would have you believe either. I had two alts in that Black legion Super welp, the one in a Dread could not cycle the siege module for the entire fight. My other character in a subcap ran slow, but all the modules actually cycled, at the expected time based on the tidi. Tidi is a temporary fix, the problem is, at the pace CCP works, that could be years before they come up with something better. In order to be involved with Sov warfare now, you must have no life, because any fight could turn into a 10 hour yawn fest Except that shiny graphics are generated client side. Just to be clear, there isn't a single server that runs the game the way you see it on your machine. This is as nice as I get. |

trader joes Ichinumi
Waltaratzor Corporation
34
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 01:49:00 -
[113] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Kharamete wrote:Pre-Tidi a big fight was 1200 people in local. Pre-tidi that crashed the node.
Current situation is 1500-4000 in local with extreme tidi plus possible node-crash.
It's always been thus. When CCP increase the capacity of a system, the player base crash the capacity with more people.
If in four years time CCP triples or quadruples the capacity, players will pile in five or six times as many.
You don't know what you're talking about. But that's hardly surprising.
I will point out that many peopel don't go to these fights because of the massive lag/tdi/glitches. These people will start going if servers get beefed up, which causes more TiDi/lag/glitches. |

Ivan Krividus
Straightedge and Compass Industrial The Crimson Tower
124
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 02:49:00 -
[114] - Quote
oh not this again |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |