Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Louis DelaBlanche
Cosmic Odyssey Chorus of Dawn
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 00:51:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Lowa I see the point and I agree but it will only work for certain scenarios.
What will work (mostly); Outbreak/Celstial vs 50% of BoB = good fights, "small" numbers and relatively small amount of lag. Reason: It was for the thrill of the fight.
What will not work: ASCN vs BoB, MC vs IAC, D2 vs AXE All can and will field fairly large numbers causing large amount of lag and node deaths. Reason: Its for the survival of an entity.
Like you say, such a system will only work for scenarios where the only thing at stake is how much fun can be had. In most cases, both sides want to have the upper hand in terms of numbers. Thus even if a group starts out with several spread out gangs, almost inevitably both sides will concentrate more & more of their forces in one place as they try to outsize the other. Its just the way it is.
|
Grimpak
Gallente Celestial Horizon Corp. Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 00:52:00 -
[32]
Edited by: Grimpak on 11/10/2006 00:54:44
Originally by: pershphanie
Originally by: NATMav EvE is broken, plain an simple. Throwing hardware at it won't fix it, turning off model rendering won't fix it, closing subs won't fix it, and lowering fleet sizes won't fix it.
There is something seriously wrong in the code that is causing these problems, and until that is addressed, throwing more and more features on top of bad code will only make it harder to track down and fix.
Why wouldnt new hardware or the ability to turn off model rendering fix the problem? Maybe there is something seriously wrong with the code. Or maybe eve just has more players than it used to and the servers are overloaded. Rendering 200+ ships in an instant has to be very stressfull for any server. You are probably right that there may be additional problems in the code in recent months. However there has always been lag in big fleet fights because the servers cant properly process that much at one time. Why shouldnt CCP give its customers the choice not to process models if it helps? Do you really think processing model rendering during big fights has nothing to do with the lag/crashing of big fleets?
model rendering fix only fixes cliend sided GFX lag. That is, if you count low framerate/slideshow EVE as lag.
tbh I would appreciate it since many people (like I) don't have hi-end (or even med end!) machines to run eve in it's full blown characteristics, nor the money to make massive upgrades to it.
as for the server side lag. I am of the opinion that something is wrong with the code. very wrong actually.
We can only hope that CCP manages to fix it.
edit: btw, server doesn't need to render the ships models. it only needs to know where are they and what are they doing (ship movement, shooting crap, firing missiles, ECM thingys, POS doing pew-pew, etc etc etc...). Server only sends the spatial location and whatever actions are happening. -------
Originally by: Abdalion
Originally by: Jebidus Skari What, in EVE, is a Tyrant?
Me. Especially when it comes to troll threads.
|
sartorii
Genco Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 01:42:00 -
[33]
if you want 'fair' duels.. there are organized tournaments.. and (most) alliances will respect a 1v1 etc..
HOWEVER.. if you come for War.. expect to be greeted with any and everything available..
War has never been about 'fair', and never will be....
as for the rest... if it bothers 'us' that much (and it does) there is always the option to suspend accounts until CCP decides performance is worth the Dev's time....
To Bad Ignorance isnt Painful |
Blacklight
Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 01:50:00 -
[34]
Originally by: NATMav EvE is broken, plain an simple. Throwing hardware at it won't fix it, turning off model rendering won't fix it, closing subs won't fix it, and lowering fleet sizes won't fix it.
There is something seriously wrong in the code that is causing these problems, and until that is addressed, throwing more and more features on top of bad code will only make it harder to track down and fix.
This man has it right.
Session change code and loading graphics have been awful since day one and have got worse since the new hardware and recent code changes have been made.
To be honest, despite the fact that we are ever more encouraged to play the team game, build empires etc etc... the servers and game in general cannot handle it. It's exceedingly dissapointing but the determined and dedicated amongst us will fight through it and continue to hope for a solution.
Eve Blacklight Style
|
Murukan
Minmatar The Priory Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 02:02:00 -
[35]
seriously what right do you have to expect a fair fight? Sorry if you didn't bandwagon up with mc you wouldn't be getting everything thrown at you. When you are defending something you don't say "oh well i'm going to only use part of my resources so my enemy can have an enjoyable time." **** that i hope we ruin your time in eve to the point you don't want to play anymore. The best conclusion would be that this war turns so miserable for you that you cancel your account. Cause you're the enemy, and a fighter never stops till his enemy is dead.
In rust we trust!!! |
Karoth Tyu
FATAL REVELATIONS
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 02:16:00 -
[36]
Originally by: NATMav There is something seriously wrong in the code that is causing these problems
*cough*Dragonpatch*cough*
|
Zedic
Amarr Shinra Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 03:06:00 -
[37]
Nez, as always your posts are intelligent well though out and informative, but I respectfully disagree. :( Many players in Eve want large scale fleet battles, it's the direction we've taken the game and now it feels as though we're dragging a mule up a mountain by it's tail. The mule is grumpy and we're not making much headway.
I personally would be happy if a Dev said something like, "Hey we know the lag is horrible, this is what we think the problem is / we don't know what the problem is - and we're working on it." That would be fine with me because then I'd know they honestly care and are working to correct the issue. And I'm sure they are, but communicating this to their customer base is soo important.
Unless someone addressed it already and I missed it! lol
p.s.
I'm not sure why my corp / alliance and sig aren't posting but I'm in Shinra, Lotka Volterra. I have the show corp and alliance things ticked in my settings as well.
|
tbow10
Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 03:09:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Manfred Sideous It is evident that servers cannot hold up to large fleet engagments. Look at the node crashes BOB & ASCN ,MCFix & IAC and friends and now AXE & D2. Perhaps its time to change the thinking. Maybe we can all show some restraint. Instead of using the lamb theory of defense and fighting perhaps its time to shift gear and start using the lion. Smaller more potent fighting squads and skirmishes spread across multiple systems. Instead of amassing the zerglings in 1 system.
Bottom line we all know the condition of the server. If you bring a massive fleet to face another the node with most probability crash. By doing so and having this information in mind beforehand is kinda lame imo. The other day I issued a public challenge to the people we were fighting that we would face them with 2 to verse our 1 odds. The reason being is they had almost 7 to 1 odds in system and it was causing node crashes. Unfortunately the enetity I challenged couldnt see the wisdom of the idea past their own needs.
But basically if you have 100s of folks wanting to fight divide them up amongst different systems. Because 100s vs 100s in one system is just going to crash the node. In olden days honorable men would meet in the center of the battlefield and discuss terms. CCP im sure is working to fix the problem but its going to take time. It is in all our best interest that try to play within the peramiters of the server capability.
you realy think that people are goign to only feild 10 people when your taking a station
|
tbow10
Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 03:11:00 -
[39]
Originally by: pershphanie
Originally by: NATMav EvE is broken, plain an simple. Throwing hardware at it won't fix it, turning off model rendering won't fix it, closing subs won't fix it, and lowering fleet sizes won't fix it.
There is something seriously wrong in the code that is causing these problems, and until that is addressed, throwing more and more features on top of bad code will only make it harder to track down and fix.
Why wouldnt new hardware or the ability to turn off model rendering fix the problem? Maybe there is something seriously wrong with the code. Or maybe eve just has more players than it used to and the servers are overloaded. Rendering 200+ ships in an instant has to be very stressfull for any server. You are probably right that there may be additional problems in the code in recent months. However there has always been lag in big fleet fights because the servers cant properly process that much at one time. Why shouldnt CCP give its customers the choice not to process models if it helps? Do you really think processing model rendering during big fights has nothing to do with the lag/crashing of big fleets?
pershphanie the problem i think is in the code this wasn't a problem before. It realy came in after rmr when they 1st put the servers in it was awsome after some bug fixing then rmr crap boom death to evrything lag like hell and just more new content which i realy don't get. Why would you put your guys on new content instead of focusing all your power to fixing the server?
|
Nez Perces
Amarr Black Spot.
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 04:06:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Zedic Many players in Eve want large scale fleet battles, it's the direction we've taken the game and now it feels as though we're dragging a mule up a mountain by it's tail. The mule is grumpy and we're not making much headway.
heh .. thats a good way to put it
|
|
travelingsales
Ars Caelestis Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 04:24:00 -
[41]
Originally by: tbow10 It realy came in after rmr when they 1st put the servers in it was awsome after some bug fixing then rmr crap boom death to evrything lag like hell and just more new content which i realy don't get. Why would you put your guys on new content instead of focusing all your power to fixing the server?
From the perspective of a (somewhat) newer player, it seems things got considerably worse this summer after Dragon was introduced. I started playing right around RMR, and I have been involved in a number of the fleet fights discussed ad naseum on this forum (Huzzah/Fix war, BoB invasion of V2, BoB vs. CODA in 9cg, more recently ASCN vs. BoB) and it has only been post-Dragon that I've seen widespread node deaths and people getting kicked and crashing to desktop daily. In any of the pre-Dragon fleet fights I was in, things were laggy (which was frustrating in and of itself) but the node didn't crash and few people CTD'd. As someone else said you could at least sort of work through the lag and you generally knew what was going on even if it was all in slow motion. I am surprised and saddened to hear that things were even better pre-RMR, as it seems as far as server stability it has been all downhill in 2006.
|
Nez Perces
Amarr Black Spot.
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 04:42:00 -
[42]
Originally by: travelingsales I am surprised and saddened to hear that things were even better pre-RMR, as it seems as far as server stability it has been all downhill in 2006.
.. well this is interesting, perhaps we can put together a lag timeline. (Please Feel free to add or correct it)
Pre RMR > lag was mangeable, obviously large fleets were still affected but not in a catastrophic way.
RMR release > Lag again still an issue, however RMR introduced node dropping at L POS battles?
Addition of blades to the server + hardware > Brief improvement noted but game performance gradually subsided to pre-hardware levels.
...period of gradual decline of server performance....
Dragon Code > meant to improve things, this code actually caused massive instability across all areas of EVE, seemingly introducing more frequent node drops leading to the abysmal state of the servers today.
OFC all this happened to a backdrop of ever-increasing numbers of players.. and its quite possible that any imrovements to code and hardware additions just kept the lag at bay and from very rapidly increasing.
It is clear that the Dragon code did something bad to server performance, but it would be nice to try and establish wether the game has been decreasing in performance due to being loaded with inefficient code or more due to increasing numbers of players across the board.
P.S If anybody would like to ammend the timeline I posted, pls feel free.. perhaps it can be like a "LAGipedia" .. I'm sure there are players out there who can add more information or correct the timeline.
|
Nez Perces
Amarr Black Spot.
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 04:49:00 -
[43]
Infact if there is enough interest in putting together a community "LAGipedia" (in the form of a thread on these forums) perhaps CCP might pay some more attention to it...
It could be not only a timeline, but known proplems that cause node drops or excessive lag.
Bug reports are great, but to have a history of lag and known problems with it all in one thread, with the people who experience it day in day out giving their input.. it could be a valuable resource.
|
Verite Rendition
Caldari AUS Corporation CORE.
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 05:23:00 -
[44]
Originally by: NATMav EvE is broken, plain an simple. Throwing hardware at it won't fix it, turning off model rendering won't fix it, closing subs won't fix it, and lowering fleet sizes won't fix it.
There is something seriously wrong in the code that is causing these problems, and until that is addressed, throwing more and more features on top of bad code will only make it harder to track down and fix.
Unfortunately, that assumes it can be fixed without rebuilding EVE. This was a small-man operation at one point, CCP has made it pretty clear the game has grown past their expectations. The hardware has changed, but at the end of the day the core server code is still the same. CCP would likely have to rewrite the entire backend to really fix things, which is basically starting from scratch, and that's not practical. ---- AUS Corp Lead Megalomanic |
Nez Perces
Amarr Black Spot.
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 05:26:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Verite Rendition [ The hardware has changed, but at the end of the day the core server code is still the same. CCP would likely have to rewrite the entire backend to really fix things, which is basically starting from scratch, and that's not practical.
yup... this is what worries me ...
|
Seleene
Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 05:56:00 -
[46]
No one in the MC should be *****ing about the enemy numbers. TBH, we haven't been this happy with an opponent since the Force of Evil contract. Bring it.
What we are *****ing about is the same thing everyone else is - the code that won't allow BOTH sides to fight with everything they have.
Then we have GM's that show up and order us not to fire on the steady stream of ships, dreads and haulers that are docking and undocking from a station that we were supposed to own... because I guess THAT is the way to deal with the node crashes?
But, oh well... we're dealing with it. What else are you gonna do? Go play WoW? Screw that. -
Movie: 9UY - Got Fighters? |
Rina Shanu
Phoenix Knights
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 06:18:00 -
[47]
As some of you would agree, if the node crash is so much of a concern, it comes in the hands of the attacker to bring in the lions. Surely a pack of lions could force the lambs to divide group.... This is a well known and fequently used strategy: have more batalions, attack in more than 1 strategic point in order to force the enemy to split forces also or loose one of the points.
Anyone remember the local nerf idea ? the one in which you are visible only if you speak? Now that would further allow for strategy...... too bad other pilots whine all the time and our life gets easier (excluding the server issues).
Image removed, not appropriate for this site. -Suvetar took you some time... what has 4 legs and 1 arm? a happy pitbull |
Le Cardinal
ECP Rogues Dusk and Dawn
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 08:26:00 -
[48]
Originally by: pershphanie
Originally by: NATMav EvE is broken, plain an simple. Throwing hardware at it won't fix it, turning off model rendering won't fix it, closing subs won't fix it, and lowering fleet sizes won't fix it.
There is something seriously wrong in the code that is causing these problems, and until that is addressed, throwing more and more features on top of bad code will only make it harder to track down and fix.
Why wouldnt new hardware or the ability to turn off model rendering fix the problem? Maybe there is something seriously wrong with the code. Or maybe eve just has more players than it used to and the servers are overloaded. Rendering 200+ ships in an instant has to be very stressfull for any server. You are probably right that there may be additional problems in the code in recent months. However there has always been lag in big fleet fights because the servers cant properly process that much at one time. Why shouldnt CCP give its customers the choice not to process models if it helps? Do you really think processing model rendering during big fights has nothing to do with the lag/crashing of big fleets?
Pardon me for being a noob here, but how will turning off model rendering actually graphic wise? Explain model rendering to me plz ;)
However, if it reduces lag considerably i for one supports this. I agree with pershphanie Reducing lag should be CCPs primary goal atm. Implementing new mods and ships and other features doesnt matter atm. At least not for me :) We managed without all the hot T2 ships before and i think we can manage a bit longer without the new features. However, lag we cant manage. Titans, dreads, carriers and motherships. All this is implemented for major warfare. Major warfare = big number of players. You cant expect large alliances to reduce amount of pilots in their gang just to adapt to the servers. It wont work. Even with 50 vs 50 in a system it lags. And you will still have 150-200 pilots in the neighbour system waiting for their turn. Nodes will crash no matter what with the current state of servers.
Now plz do something about it CCP. At least have the dignity to respond to these threads. It is a major problem. Dont turn the blind eye to the community.
ECP.R killboard |
Grimpak
Gallente Celestial Horizon Corp. Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 08:51:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Le Cardinal
Originally by: pershphanie
Originally by: NATMav EvE is broken, plain an simple. Throwing hardware at it won't fix it, turning off model rendering won't fix it, closing subs won't fix it, and lowering fleet sizes won't fix it.
There is something seriously wrong in the code that is causing these problems, and until that is addressed, throwing more and more features on top of bad code will only make it harder to track down and fix.
Why wouldnt new hardware or the ability to turn off model rendering fix the problem? Maybe there is something seriously wrong with the code. Or maybe eve just has more players than it used to and the servers are overloaded. Rendering 200+ ships in an instant has to be very stressfull for any server. You are probably right that there may be additional problems in the code in recent months. However there has always been lag in big fleet fights because the servers cant properly process that much at one time. Why shouldnt CCP give its customers the choice not to process models if it helps? Do you really think processing model rendering during big fights has nothing to do with the lag/crashing of big fleets?
Pardon me for being a noob here, but how will turning off model rendering actually graphic wise? Explain model rendering to me plz ;)
However, if it reduces lag considerably i for one supports this. I agree with pershphanie Reducing lag should be CCPs primary goal atm. Implementing new mods and ships and other features doesnt matter atm. At least not for me :) We managed without all the hot T2 ships before and i think we can manage a bit longer without the new features. However, lag we cant manage. Titans, dreads, carriers and motherships. All this is implemented for major warfare. Major warfare = big number of players. You cant expect large alliances to reduce amount of pilots in their gang just to adapt to the servers. It wont work. Even with 50 vs 50 in a system it lags. And you will still have 150-200 pilots in the neighbour system waiting for their turn. Nodes will crash no matter what with the current state of servers.
Now plz do something about it CCP. At least have the dignity to respond to these threads. It is a major problem. Dont turn the blind eye to the community.
as I said above turning off models only help when you get poor framerates in bigger fleetbattles. It's not lag per se, but more like slideshow sindrome. I hope that the new trinity engine will solve part of the issue since EVE is more CPU dependant than gfx card dependant, by shifting a bigger part of the grafical workload to the gpu than today.
"true" lag however is the module activation lag and such. and atm that's where the main issue is imho. -------
Originally by: Abdalion
Originally by: Jebidus Skari What, in EVE, is a Tyrant?
Me. Especially when it comes to troll threads.
|
El Covah
No Quarter. Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 08:52:00 -
[50]
What do I play this game for ?
I was impressed 3 years ago by the possibility of a giant playground where players actually can build, defend and fight for their own space. I still remember the Jove-Event where some strange ambassador added the alliances to the "Jove register of nations". I mean, the idea is great. This is why I started the game and why I play it. The possibility that there is no difference between NPC and player created "empires".
Hell yeah, I was so happy when all the events in the south started. Finally something exciting, something great to happen - one more step to a fully player created world. And what has it become ? This is no fun at all. This is just frustrating, the game is broken and I already started seeing more and more of the people which I know for several years now (on every side of the current events, same in BoB as in D¦ or ASCN/AXE) neither do not login anymore or cancel their accounts.
I know it is difficult to debug code if you cannot create breakpoints etc. (which won't be cool at all in a fleetbattle ) and need realtime debugging. But seriously I hope this gets fixed before the Kali launch.
|
|
Mortecai
No Quarter. Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 09:14:00 -
[51]
Originally by: El Covah
I know it is difficult to debug code if you cannot create breakpoints etc. (which won't be cool at all in a fleetbattle ) and need realtime debugging. But seriously I hope this gets fixed before the Kali launch.
Looking at the track record for CCP it's not looking good. Long gone are the days where we could brag about EVE being in pretty good shape compared to other games. Each new content patch has made it worse in gameplay wise. Content has been added, but the cherry on the top (fleetbattles) is getting more rotten patch by patch.
To be honest im abit scared of Kali now. Not because of the features it brings, they rock. But because if CCP doesnt change the way they code their expansions, then Kali will totally mess up the gaming experience (or what's left of it) and they will suffer the fate of SWG.
Devs: Talk to us, like one of our corpies stated: There is no such thing as too much information. Even bad news is some time good news.
|
Shin Ra
BURN EDEN
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 09:15:00 -
[52]
5 of us faught 15 LV last night and got about 5-10 second module lag. No more than 20 in local and its still laggy as ****.
|
Semkhet
The Priory Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 09:33:00 -
[53]
I would like to somewhat explain a bit the problem of lag. Then you will see that there is no simple solution.
In a distributed client-server architecture like EVE, lag is function of 3 main factors: a) the time needed by clients to process inbound and outbound data, b) the time needed to transfer this data between clients->server and server->clients, and the time needed by the server to process the inbound/outbound data from/to all connected individual clients.
a) Each time your client receives data, it must act on it. This may imply from a refresh of your interface to complex calculations and hard disk activity. Each time you do something in EVE, your client sends data to the server. Often, the cpu load your client suffers when having to process the server data is intimately interleaved with the processing related to your own actions which have to be sent back to the server. This happens mostly in space (specially PvP, Pve is less demanding) versus the relative static environment of docking stations. Every single element that will delay the speed at which your client talks with the server will increase lag. This implies almost every part of your computer participating in these activities, from harddisk access, reading and writing speed to the graphic adapter velocity passing by the raw cpu power of your machine, not to speak about all the routines hooked up to your system by the operating system (everything eats cpu time, even if you don't notice it, and has a cumulative effect).
Player-side remedy: Shut down every application which isn't needed. Big ressource hookers are antivirus and anti-malware programs which constantly work in the background. Hence don't surf the net/retrieve mail while playing since it implies to maintain your computer Desactivate every overview feature that isn't essential. Don't talk on voice comms unless mandatory.
CCP-side remedy: CCP has long ago decided to develop most of the code with Python. All scripting and compiled scripting languages have in common the singularity of sacrificing EXECUTION speed in order to achieve DEVELOPMENT speed. While this may initially make life easier to programmers, it induces processing-time problems on the client-side execution because being Python a dynamically-typed language, IIRC there is no compiler that is able to generate efficient code since Python often must handle data objects with a generic strategy. Maybe it's time CCP starts to think about translating their client into a mixed application using C & inline assembler. C is at least 5 times faster than Python, and Assembler is twice as fast as C. Also, data written during gameplay on disk should be limited as much as possible. It is of little significance to grind milliseconds here and there by optimizing the coding if harddisks get unduly sollicited.
b) The internet is physically a spidernet of various technologies bridged togheter. Data is transmitted on copper or optic fiber lines and by microwaves to/from satellites. No matter the line technology, a common requisite is the presence of repeaters in order to adquire, reshape, reamplify and reemit the signals which get damped during their travel. That's the first source of lag: repeaters are electronic devices working magnitudes slower than the medias they interface with. Second lag source: routers, which not only suffer the same shortcomings than repeaters, but on top often reallocate the output on different lines in order to balance load accross the network. Then we have the third source of lag: since the routers may change the routing at any time due to constantly varying network load conditions, and since digital streams are segmented in tiny packets, a rerouting almost always occurs between packets pertaining to the same stream. It means that there is no guarantee that packet A of stream X will get at destination BEFORE packet B.
|
R3dSh1ft
Caldari FIRMA Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 09:35:00 -
[54]
No.
No.
No.
We will not fight on your terms.
We will defend our home whatever it takes.
We will be victorious. ______________________________________
|
EroniX
Minmatar Reikoku Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 09:41:00 -
[55]
I've been playing since the beginning & have never *****ed on the forums about lag, crashes, nerfs,... because it just wasn't that bad. However, in the past few months the server's performance has been really irritating!
As for turning off the models: it might help to improve framerates & maybe lag but we might aswell go play a text based game. We're already playing without turret effects(which are great) and sound(which is even greater). You could argue that I could just play with them... but if it makes me lose ships because other people load the environment faster and have less lag, do I then really have a choice?
The game needs to be fixed but in my book fixing does not mean removing features.
|
Tanya Kovacs
SteelVipers YouWhat
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 09:53:00 -
[56]
Edited by: Tanya Kovacs on 11/10/2006 09:57:29 Edited by: Tanya Kovacs on 11/10/2006 09:53:05
Originally by: Karoth Tyu
Originally by: NATMav There is something seriously wrong in the code that is causing these problems
*cough*Dragonpatch*cough*
No! Devs told us Dragonpatch solved tons of performance problems.
But as a player I have to say everything went very wrong since some month now. In a few weeks we will get new great features (which are decorated with some few bugs as usual). I'm curious how many developers are actually working on FIXING PROBLEMS instead of BRINGING NEW CONTENT (and some new problems) IN. But hey.. solving problems isn't good PR because it confirms there were massive problems. Spreading press releases about three dozens of new features and an continuously growing player database is better PR. Everything is "fine" for CCP atm, because playerbase grows and grows and grows. But in the long run this will hopefully not work.
The "good" news is - more and more 0.0-players grumble. And this grumbling is constantly increasing for some month now. I wish I could travel to Iceland in November. Will be interesting..
But as a sidenote: It's not only CCPs problem. Whenever they enhance the performance players are increasing their blobs. This will not be solved until gamemechanics change but I doubt this will happen. Anyway - the problems in the last month are general problems. Fights with numbers which were ok before are now awful and full of lag. -- All my postings reflects just my personal opinion and my lacking knowledge of proper english.
There is no lag in EVE \o/ |
Nez Perces
Amarr Black Spot.
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 10:03:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Semkhet .. impressive post, very educational...
did you write all that out yourself? cause if you did.. thx ... good reading.... even if you didnt it was still a very good read..
anyways.. If what you are saying is true, then CCP's hands may be pretty tied.
K.. there is a problem with node dropping particularly at POS and at session changes (gate jumping of big fleets), they should be able to solve that.
But that does not solve the underlying and inescapable truth that the technology available to CCP is simply not able to keep up with the ever increasing fleet sizes. And hence the crippling lag experienced by v large fleets.
Shinra, complained of a small engagement being laggy, well its not surprising if there are lots of huge battles going on all over EVE.
When the big alliances field their mega-fleets the whole server gets affected.
... and there doesn't seem to be a solution to this problem.. unless we the players cap fleet sizes in any one engagement. And I know nobody likes this idea.. but it does seem like the only way forward imo.
|
Zafon
Caldari FATAL REVELATIONS Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 10:07:00 -
[58]
Does anybody remember a comment from one of the devs immediately after the Dragon patch along the lines of "some Kali code got introduced but we don't know what it was"? It may have been solely in relation to missions (remember the complete absence of courier missions immediately post Dragon and multiple types of the same mission etc)?
Either way, the fact that the wrong code or code they are not certain of could be introduced to the code base in an uncontrolled way is seriously worrying.
I've never seen a dev post saying "we chased all that erroneously incorporated code down and removed it from the current production code base".....
|
Wilfan Ret'nub
Singularity.
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 11:56:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Semkhet Player-side remedy: Shut down every application which isn't needed.
I must add that the biggest resource hog is Teamspeak. That application uses a lot of CPU when someone is speaking, noticabley more than Ventrillo.
Originally by: Semkhet IIRC there is no compiler that is able to generate efficient code since Python often must handle data objects with a generic strategy. Maybe it's time CCP starts to think about translating their client into a mixed application using C & inline assembler. C is at least 5 times faster than Python, and Assembler is twice as fast as C.
First, broad remark like "computer language A is X times faster than B" is just ignorant blathering, plain and simple. There's plenty of benchmarks where Fortran trumps every high-level language (including C) by order of magnitude and even whole batches of tests where Java or OcamML beat C++. Compilers and virtual machines can do evil optimizations most programmers can't even dream of. Even without them, workloads and program implementations vary too much to reduce the difference to a simple ratio.
EVE (node) server is not written in Python, but in Stackless Python. It has native support for "lightweigth threads" and related concurrency conecepts, which should make massively parallel severs (which EVE node certainly is) easier to write and make them more performant (yes, those two go hand in hand).
I say should, as Stackless Python is unproven in practice - EVE might very well be one of the largest commercial deployments. Because of that, there's probably a lack of decent tools (profilers, loggers, debuggers) for it and more important, a lack of experienced Stackless Python developers.
Even so, we don't know how much of the server is written in Stackless Python. It might well have significant parts written in C/C++ or it might use buggy non-Python libraries.
The days of large scale assembler programming days are long gone. Current x86 architecture is too user unfriendly to write a lot of code that performs well. Also keep in mind that compilers have greatly improved since the 90ties. And in the end, nodes crash due to errors in the code, not due to slow calculations.
Originally by: Semkhet b) The internet is physically a spidernet of various technologies bridged togheter
Lag due to "the internet" does not cause what we're seeing right now. If data from the client is lagging, server treats as if client did nothing. This kind of lag cannot crash a node neither lag out other players. ------ No ISK, no fun |
Wilfan Ret'nub
Singularity.
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 12:03:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Zafon Either way, the fact that the wrong code or code they are not certain of could be introduced to the code base in an uncontrolled way is seriously worrying.
Originally by: Zafon I've never seen a dev post saying "we chased all that erroneously incorporated code down and removed it from the current production code base".....
Now I can't get the mental picture of code as some kind of viral or poisonous substance out of my head. Like it's some rogue T-Virus that turns nodes into flesh-eating zombies. Even after 5+ years of programming experience. ------ No ISK, no fun |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |