| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Sakaron Hefdover
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
35
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 11:24:00 -
[91] - Quote
Not gonna read an essay in GD sorry |

Doc Severide
State War Academy Caldari State
17
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 11:25:00 -
[92] - Quote
Winter Archipelago wrote:Nex Killer wrote:Their servers could be upgraded with some GPUs and recode the gameserver so most of processing is done on the GPUs. GPUs processing is 100x faster then CPUs and this could fix the TiDi because the GPUs could keep up with the commands quicker then the CPU can. But I don't see CCP doing this, which is sad. There are so many errors in this small post of yours that I don't even know where to begin... Do I start with the GPU / CPU part? The upgraded servers part? The recoding the game part? The "refusal" on CCP's part part? The rate at which data is processed part? Every single sentence in your post is wrong, some on multiple levels. Please, for the sake of everyone who works with computers, go learn about computers and programming before you make a post like this again. Please. Edit :: Unless you're trolling... That post would make sense if it were a troll. Please, please be a troll... I was thinking the same thing. I'm betting he was completely serious... |

James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8652
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 11:28:00 -
[93] - Quote
Layla Firoue wrote:Even if CCP had a Cray Titan people would find ways to cram enough people/accounts into one system to make it lag! Except EVE wouldn't run on it. Rewriting EVE to be able to do that would make it able to run just fine on a significantly smaller platform utilizing parallelism across multiple cores. In any case, there are only so many people playing EVE, only so many of which are even in nullsec, only so many of which are involved in this war, and only so many of which are active for these fights, and only so many of which choose to participate. Just because we hit the limits each incremental increase doesn't mean we wouldn't ever reach a point where the system will be able to support more than we bring. I mean, it's already the case that the system supports many more players than most battles reach. These battles become famous because they hit those limits. My EVE Videos |

Kimmi Chan
Tastes Like Purple
648
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 11:29:00 -
[94] - Quote
So longer than normal downtime because all you ******* decided to break ****?
Well done. 
"You should just create one thread and put all of your complaints in it instead of littering the forums with multiple threads." ~CCP Falcon
Paranoia never killed anyone. -áA complete absence of it has. |

Dior Rellik
NERFSQUAD
3
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 11:30:00 -
[95] - Quote
Almethea wrote:4k ppl in system and no crash, GJ CCP!
now this thread need more of : nerf hisec for more ppl in null, nerf hisec for more cauz we need more prod in null and many more of comon stupid thing
stop blaming ccp, the code arent the problem it's only how you play.
everybody know how tidi turned the game and before it was only black screen, next time dont jump?
Learn to read man. You'll see many posts (across many sites not just here) where players are saying the same thing. Waiting 30mins for one command to be completed is no better than being stuck in warp and the system not loading. The people experiencing this all said they couldn't even log back into the game.
People were still "coming out of warp" into the wrecking ball well after the battle ended.
So no I'm sorry Tidi has done nothing to improve the game, frozen gameplay is just as bad as disconnections!. Past server upgrades etc are what has allowed more people into a system but allowing a 4000k limit when its unstable at 3k just defeats the object. |

Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
547
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 11:31:00 -
[96] - Quote
Doc Severide wrote: I was thinking the same thing. I'm betting he was completely serious...
Actually he's right but I'm certain it would be impossible with the current code base. |

James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8652
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 11:33:00 -
[97] - Quote
Tidi has done plenty to improve the game. It allows us to have significantly larger battles than before without node crashes, black screens, unresponsive modules, et cetera. These problems still occur in the largest of battles of course, but to say that significantly raising the breaking point didn't benefit the game at all is a bit disingenuous. My EVE Videos |

Loraine Gess
Confedeferate Union of Tax Legalists
54
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 11:35:00 -
[98] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Dior Rellik wrote:Maybe with the criticism, people could also be a bit more constructive and give some solutions to the problem. I've fought in large scale battles with CFC and old NC and there is northing worse than clicking on lock target or f1 for weaponry and waiting half an hour for one cycle. Tonights big fights sounded like complete hell for those coming into the system
The only solution I can see is system capacity capage. Allowing 4k players into a system for them to not actually be able to play the game in a free flowing manner is NOT achieving anything remotely worthwhile (lag free is impossible but playable surely isn't!). So what if it statistically breaks records. It does not improve game-play in the slightest and only enhances community rage. So as said why bother ? In a battle such as this, I think they need to consider capping the amount of pilots allowed into a system that is pre-planned for a major battle.
I think the larger alliance would then have to think a lot harder about what fleets / ships they are going to drop in. More planning and tactics and much less blobbage.
If technology is not sufficient enough to handle this sort of gaming environment, then we need other alternatives. Another solution could a be a type of combat arena. Limited to 1000 pilots (or whatever the node can handle without Tidi). Each side can have as many pilots on standby as they wish but only a set amount from either side can enter the arena at any given time. Players from each side could be moved in from another node at intervals during the fight to maintain numbers. The fight could last for hours or even days if pilots are in fleet ready to go and willing to keep losing assets. EG Fight; Arena size of 1000 km to allow FC's to warp to optimal's or utilize other strategic maneuvers. Beacons could be utilized as drop points for new combatants. They would only be accessible by 'blues' and shielded in a manner similar to a pos to allow new combatants a way of entering the battle without being popped as soon as they are dropped into the system. Each side has a maximum 500 ships on field limits, 150 capitals - 200 battleship, battle cruiser - 150 cruiser, frigate. As the battle progresses destroyed ships are replaced from backup fleets at preset intervals, if you lost 50 capitals 30 battleships or battle cruisers and 100 cruisers and frigates they could be moved from backup fleet to the arena. If you don't want to field another 50 capitals they could be replaced with 50 from any other class but no more than 150 capitals and a maximum of 500 ships could be on field at a time. Arena fights could be for a predetermined time or until one side says enough, or is unable to field more combatants. Fc's would need to think carefully about what ships they are fielding and what they have in replacement fleets. It may mean fielding 150 caps 300 cruisers and 50 frigates or 150 caps 200 battleships with the rest being subcap support with a few dictors thrown in. A 1000km arena means smaller ships like frigates and cruisers are not just stuck on field to be blapped by drone spewing battleships and carriers, there is room to warp around strategically. *Arena fights would not of course remove "sov grinds" but for mass pre-planned engagements, they could be a solution to waiting for hours to jump to a fight only to sit in 10% tidi for hours on end. Probably not everyone's idea of a good plan but it may be somewhere to start.
Okay here's the plan guys: We completely **** on all strategic advantages you've built for yourself while simultaneously making the ONLY way to win be 100% limited engagements which will invariably turn into mirror matches until one side gets enough wife aggro to stop playing for a week.
|

James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8652
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 11:38:00 -
[99] - Quote
And EVE could possibly be made to run a significant portion of its server code on GPGPUs or parallel cores but it would take a complete rewrite of the game, from scratch, in a different language. It would be such a massive undertaking that it would require the entire development team to stop working on current EVE. They would lose a lot of subscribers over the years they would be doing this, it would cost a lot of money because they would of course have to keep paying wages and fees, and they would probably have to invest in new hardware to run the new code (since Tranquility is heavily optimized for single-core performance per node). My EVE Videos |

Almethea
Trans Stellar Express
39
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 11:38:00 -
[100] - Quote
in major fight, the problem of log back in was already exist since i play (early 2006...yes i'm an alt)
the "wrecking ball" arent new , N3 are using it since a looooong moment now. it was stupid to jump 500 dread and hope they load.
If they improve for 8k ppl, "you" will bing 8k.
also does i said tidi improved something? WTS BPO : |

Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
547
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 11:41:00 -
[101] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:And EVE could possibly be made to run a significant portion of its server code on GPGPUs or parallel cores but it would take a complete rewrite of the game, from scratch, in a different language. It would be such a massive undertaking that it would require the entire development team to stop working on current EVE. They would lose a lot of subscribers over the years they would be doing this, it would cost a lot of money because they would of course have to keep paying wages and fees, and they would probably have to invest in new hardware to run the new code (since Tranquility is heavily optimized for single-core performance per node).
CCP should have R&D. |

James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8652
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 11:42:00 -
[102] - Quote
What would that imply?
(I'm pretty sure they already do, but humor me.) My EVE Videos |

Doc Severide
State War Academy Caldari State
17
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 11:51:00 -
[103] - Quote
Almethea wrote:4k ppl in system and no crash, GJ CCP!
now this thread need more of : nerf null for more ppl in hi-sec, nerf null for more cauz we need more prod in hi-sec and many more of comon stupid thing fixed it for you.... |

Kappy Ukap
K For Kill
7
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 11:58:00 -
[104] - Quote
Hearing all about this HED-GP fight in channels in EVE and in forums makes me happy I didn't take part in this battle, or even visited it. |

Walextheone
The Red Circle Inc.
73
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 12:06:00 -
[105] - Quote
To all you who are complaining, a lot of AAA games really have a hardcap of 64 players. 4000 players are pretty extreme and no other game seems to be able to cope with that many.
The code isn't not much of a problem, it's the hardware, even when using experimental overclockecked CPUs there is a cap.
Some says a multlithreaded setup up would raise the bars even higher, but at this point is pure speculation on how much it would really help.
Big kudos to CCP |

Kappy Ukap
K For Kill
7
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 12:16:00 -
[106] - Quote
Walextheone wrote:To all you who are complaining, a lot of AAA games really have a hardcap of 64 players. 4000 players are pretty extreme and no other game seems to be able to cope with that many.
The code isn't not much of a problem, it's the hardware, even when using experimental overclockecked CPUs there is a cap.
Some says a multlithreaded setup up would raise the bars even higher, but at this point is pure speculation on how much it would really help.
Big kudos to CCP
True, EVE is the only game that can handle such high amounts of players at one area like this. It's surprising how it can even handle 4000 players without crashing or freezing in the first place. |

Katran Luftschreck
Royal Ammatar Engineering Corps
2211
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 12:29:00 -
[107] - Quote
Y'know, there is another solution to your giant blob problems... Nullsec in a Nutshell: http://nedroid.com/comics/2006-08-24-2155-arrrdino.gif |

Angelica Dreamstar
Epic Boo Bees
197
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 12:43:00 -
[108] - Quote
Walextheone wrote:To all you who are complaining, a lot of AAA games really have a hardcap of 64 players. 4000 players are pretty extreme and no other game seems to be able to cope with that many.
The code isn't not much of a problem, it's the hardware, even when using experimental overclockecked CPUs there is a cap.
Some says a multlithreaded setup up would raise the bars even higher, but at this point is pure speculation on how much it would really help.
Big kudos to CCP *sighs* It's always pure speculation, before one has at least a slight clue of what he is talking about. Create a new, pretty, female character! Make the name count! Join the epic boo bees! (RP,PvE/PvP,wardecs,new players!) You're at it from day 0! |

Doc Severide
State War Academy Caldari State
17
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 12:51:00 -
[109] - Quote
Kappy Ukap wrote:True, EVE is the only game that can handle such high amounts of players at one area like this. It's surprising how it can even handle 4000 players without crashing or freezing in the first place. This was "handling" it? |

Dizzy Morbo
The Black Company G.C. Darkness of Despair
19
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 13:10:00 -
[110] - Quote
Is it kind of joke about good job from CCP? 10% TiDi sure? Of course, fight was great for PL and N3 that jumped in HED system 8 hours!!! before timer came out. Jumping to the cyno in HED took me 1,5 hour of real time, 30% of jumped pilots could not make it finally to the destination system, either been stuck in the tunnel or killed being still in warp tunnel. We all wanted to have super capital fight but in the end had literally no fight, siege modules and guns at dreads did not activate (making them useless in such kind of engagements), portaling fleet took 1,5 hour, lots of crashing clients, real TiDi was not 10% but rather 1%. As the result it was not the fight we all wanted to have. Yes, well done CCP you make this game better from day to day 
|

Josef Djugashvilis
Acme Mining Corporation
1965
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 13:12:00 -
[111] - Quote
Dizzy Morbo wrote:Is it kind of joke about good job from CCP? 10% TiDi sure? Of course, fight was great for PL and N3 that jumped in HED system 8 hours!!! before timer came out. Jumping to the cyno in HED took me 1,5 hour of real time, 30% of jumped pilots could not make it finally to the destination system, either been stuck in the tunnel or killed being still in warp tunnel. We all wanted to have super capital fight but in the end had literally no fight, siege modules and guns at dreads did not activate (making them useless in such kind of engagements), portaling fleet took 1,5 hour, lots of crashing clients, real TiDi was not 10% but rather 1%. As the result it was not the fight we all wanted to have. Yes, well done CCP you make this game better from day to day 
So the smart guys who planned ahead won the battle.
Sounds fair to me. This is not a signature. |

Erin Crawford
23
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 13:18:00 -
[112] - Quote
Dizzy Morbo wrote:Is it kind of joke about good job from CCP? 10% TiDi sure? Of course, fight was great for PL and N3 that jumped in HED system 8 hours!!! before timer came out. Jumping to the cyno in HED took me 1,5 hour of real time, 30% of jumped pilots could not make it finally to the destination system, either been stuck in the tunnel or killed being still in warp tunnel. We all wanted to have super capital fight but in the end had literally no fight, siege modules and guns at dreads did not activate (making them useless in such kind of engagements), portaling fleet took 1,5 hour, lots of crashing clients, real TiDi was not 10% but rather 1%. As the result it was not the fight we all wanted to have. Yes, well done CCP you make this game better from day to day 
Has there ever been a 2000+ battle in a system without any TiDi at all?
Layla Firoue wrote:You guys KNEW that there would be heavy Tidi, you guys KNEW that the node would be unresponsive and yet... |

James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8655
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 13:27:00 -
[113] - Quote
And before someone says "get faster processors" it should also be mentioned that we've pretty much reached the limit as far as single-core performance.
From here CCP has two options, one of which they're taking
The first approach is, as mentioned above, to completely rewrite all of EVE from the ground up, in a language other than Stackless Python, to exploit the powers of parallel computing. Some game mechanics would probably have to change for this to happen, invariably some bugs will get fixed while many, many more would be introduced, and it would be a massive undertaking for an extended period of time that would completely stagnate the game in the interim. This would also require them to essentially build an entirely new server, which would itself be an expensive undertaking.
The other approach, which CCP is taking, is to make extensive optimizations to various individual parts of the program. CCP's server load balancing algorithm, Brain in a Box, and other related projects are all a part of this effort. It requires significantly less programming effort, most likely won't introduce nearly as many new bugs (some are to be expected), and the CCP doesn't have to stop iterating on the actual game for this to happen. My EVE Videos |

Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1473
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 14:00:00 -
[114] - Quote
Kimmi Chan wrote:Dior Rellik wrote:I think they need to consider capping the amount of pilots allowed into a system that is pre-planned for a major battle. Coalitions would then pack the system so no opposition could enter the system to stop them. MonkeyMagic Thiesant wrote:Dior Rellik wrote:Maybe with the criticism, people could also be a bit more constructive and give some solutions to the problem. OK, then short of major rewriting of large chunks of eve's codebase, which perhaps isn't possible, then change the objectives of the sov system. If the game is heavily limited in what a single system can handle, then force the colliding fleets to split their forces across multiple systems to accomplish their objectives. In other words, rather than 3000 capsuleers all piling into one system, split that 3000 across an entire constellation of 6 or 7 systems. Thus: an average 500 a system, maybe 1000 max. The servers can handle that, perhaps even without tidi. Make it so they have some infrastructure objective to complete in each, roughly simultaneously, or some "state of the war" running count as faction warfare has. Or both. The details don't really matter, just anything that forces the fleets to split their numbers across multiple systems. Someone above mentioned a road traffic analogy, which is fair enough. Supply is limited, and any extra capacity for a single system will soon be swamped. The difference is that CCP can change the target destination of all the traffic fairly easily, and thus solve everything on the demand side. Then coalitions would bring 3000 people to each of those 6 or 7 systems. Right now you have a box and there are too many people in the box. They can't move. There isn't even enough room for them to scratch their asses. If you make the box bigger so those people can move around more freely, they will just bring MORE PEOPLE and fill up the volume of the new, bigger box until none of them can move.
|

Kaska Aya
REPUBLIKA ORLA C0VEN
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 14:01:00 -
[115] - Quote
warping 8,9 AU ~ 10min (not bad) launching drones ~ 50min assisting drones ~ 1h40min then align ~ 2min o.O first time my drones shot ~ 50min then i go afk...
7h fight, my drones shot 11times...
and today i check kb, i have only 1kill and its on ally pod (Weapon: Unknown WTF HOW!?)
GJ CCP BEST FIGHT EVER! |

Nerf Ratting
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 14:21:00 -
[116] - Quote
Would people have preferred the server to crash?
No matter what CCP does to optimise processing, sides will bring more people to the fight and fill up the excess capacity. A fight with 3500-4000 would have been unheard of five years ago.
No one likes to lose but complaints about how the game is broken is silly. Adapt and avoid making such mistakes in the future. |

Trii Seo
Sabotage Incorporated Executive Outcomes
484
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 14:35:00 -
[117] - Quote
Josef Djugashvilis wrote: So the smart guys who planned ahead won the battle.
Sounds fair to me.
Well, it kind of was a reverse of the battle of 6VDT. That time we bridged in way ahead of time, spreading jump-ins to reduce TiDi. Also, as far as I recall - and a dev could be so nice and tell us exactly, dispel the rumours once and for all - it's just the client that's written in stackless python.
Various things contribute to the server load but by far the worst of them is the Session Change. Session change (which, to my knowledge, updates your skill queue, implants, how your stuff affects your ship and guns...) occurs when switching systems. If we look at this battle for instance, by the looks of it what snapped the node (or brought it to near-halt) was 500 dreadnoughts jumping in, with the node already under heavy TiDi.
I guess, at this point while CCP works on mitigating the blob via sov mechanics, the only thing they can do is try to implement the "Brain in a box" concept mentioned during fanfest - and that's hardly an easy task. Is it Hotdrop O'Clock yet?
Covert pilots unite! Safer working conditions, less accidental limb loss due to unfortunate Cyno accidents! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=258986 |

Mr Blah Blahson
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
21
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 15:48:00 -
[118] - Quote
I am unsure of why people are blaming a lack of processing power on this. Local system optimization is most likely not the issue here. We have 4,000 people relaying commands to one server at once. The server must process all those commands, then distribute all 4,000 results to all 4,000 people at once. Maybe in 2050 we'll have technology (that's realistically priced) that can pull this off effectively. As for today, let's get real; not gonna happen.
Most obvious solution is as mentioned, to rework Sov mechanics. Find a way to give incentives to NOT escalate past 500 players per side. A similar system to incursions could work; giving large bonuses' to fleets that arrive with the "optimal size". Large groups like the CFC need to be able to form "superalliances" with eachother in order of this mechanic to work. In cases where more than 2 superalliances clash in a system, this mechanic would of course begin to fall apart as the numbers reach 1,500+ again. However for Superalliance vs. Superalliance, this could limit the system to 1,000 players thus providing a mostly playable atmosphere. I do not know how such an incentive system would work to truly promote this, but as a base idea this is the way to go IMO.
- Blah |

Roxie Glitz
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
17
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 15:56:00 -
[119] - Quote
"The serverlog knows in each situation, which bump was friendly/unfriendly"
2000vs2000
|

JD No7
V I R I I Ineluctable.
84
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 16:44:00 -
[120] - Quote
A constellation based sov warfare system, with multiple points to be hit at the same time, may help BUT all will happen is that the attackers will move as a group from one system to the next killing the defenders fleets and THEN split up to do the simultaneous stuff. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |