EVE Search - Fair fleet engagements still not possible in EVE !

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Fair fleet engagements still not possible in EVE !

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Jeewee	Posted - 2006.10.13 15:34:00 - [1] Even fights of 40vs40 create tramendous lag. What makes it so difficult for CCP to solve the lag problem and focus on that for a while ? I haven't noticed any difference compared to when CCP claimed they were going to actually do something about the lag problem. What did I miss ? Is it still being investigated ? Do we know what causes the lag (again) ? Is there any way to solve it ? It's getting annoying...again.
Ediz Daxx FinFleet Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.10.13 15:37:00 - [2] Deja vu.
Jeewee	Posted - 2006.10.13 15:41:00 - [3] Thank you for your very intelligent reply...
Major Stormer Caldari Demon Womb Xelas Alliance	Posted - 2006.10.13 15:42:00 - [4] No, Thank YOU for the 100000th post on this topic. -------------------------- Above post is my opinion only and does not represent my corp/alliance.
Darius Shakor Minmatar Freelance Unincorporated Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2006.10.13 15:45:00 - [5] Not to pass the book but do you think this will ever get fixed at all? Half of the problem is player created too you know. Players find 10 vs 10 laggy. Devs fix it so 10 vs 10 is nice and smoothe. One side decided to outblob the other so it is 20 vs 10. Other side brings 20 next time too making other side bring 30... well you get the picture. Shortly there after they hit the lag wall again and fill the forums with complaints. Devs work on a new fix, more hardware, better load balancing etc. So now 50 vs 50 is ok until we hit 100 vs 100. How many players in a fleet should CCP cater for? 200, 300, 500? No matter how much they help the lag situation, players will bring more to the fight until they hit lag again. And the fact that the player base expands constantly and adds more people to it, this will always be a problem. So think on this: Try playing a 40 vs 40 on the 2003 server with an old version of eve. See how much worse it is than today. Then realise that CCP do make improvements all the while, but increasing numbers of players means the job will never be done. Ohh and they won't admit it as well, because that is never a good image to hand to the paying customer. Especially when they know it isn't true. But no MMOG out there doesn't have lag when you get a large number of players in a small space so eve will never be the exception. So, what would you like them to do about it? ------ Shakor Clan Information Portal http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=3
Jeewee	Posted - 2006.10.13 15:46:00 - [6] You're welcome... So gimme a link then where they actually tell us what's up with this !
Emily Spankratchet Minmatar Pragmatics	Posted - 2006.10.13 15:48:00 - [7] Originally by: Jeewee You're welcome... So gimme a link then where they actually tell us what's up with this ! About 10% of the dev blogs over the past few months? I don't want to be an apologist for CCP - some of the stuff since Dragon has been pretty diabolical. But they're working on it, and answering every OMG LAG SUX! thread isn't going to speed them up.
Cabadrin Caldari Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2006.10.13 15:50:00 - [8] Originally by: Jeewee You're welcome... So gimme a link then where they actually tell us what's up with this ! Owned _______________________________________________
Ediz Daxx FinFleet Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.10.13 15:51:00 - [9] Devblogs ftw, reading them double ftw!
Jeewee	Posted - 2006.10.13 15:51:00 - [10] Well if you put something like POS'es in game and capital ships , knowing you need a big fleet to take down a POS and closing a system, or even to take a Player owned station in 0.0, you have to make sure that the server side can handle it imo. Alliances are formed which means you know you'll have to deal with big numbers and prepare for it. Maybe they missed a few steps there...
Jeewee	Posted - 2006.10.13 15:54:00 - [11] Originally by: Cabadrin Originally by: Jeewee You're welcome... So gimme a link then where they actually tell us what's up with this ! Owned Lag is not mentioned at all in that post... Gimme another one...
Ediz Daxx FinFleet Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.10.13 15:56:00 - [12] So getting more/better hardware isnt a sign of them wanting to reduce lag... wow my world just turned upside down.
Cabadrin Caldari Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2006.10.13 15:57:00 - [13] Originally by: Jeewee Originally by: Cabadrin Originally by: Jeewee You're welcome... So gimme a link then where they actually tell us what's up with this ! Owned Lag is not mentioned at all in that post... Gimme another one... Originally by: Devblog ownage we have some big batches of hardware coming from IBM over the next months, resulting in more than 30 servers being added to Tranquility (that's 60 more nodes). Originally by: Devblog ownage Yeah, we continue to fix and deploy hotfixes to Tranquility. Often, these are fixes which you shouldn't really notice, where we're gaining small performance here or addressing a certain issue there, but we also deploy tools. Owned again! _______________________________________________
Quin Tal Fort Knox Inc Expeto Libertas Foedus	Posted - 2006.10.13 16:00:00 - [14] CCP is always trying to improve their stability and performance. Big performance issues being addressed with Kali, so just stay tuned for that.
Jeewee	Posted - 2006.10.13 16:01:00 - [15] "Wanting" yes, but it didn't solve it last time more hardware was added. We'll all have to live with it, i agree, but all i asked was some to the point reference or whatever to the problem... Because of some replies to my simple question this turns into a rant thread...pathetic actually.
Jeewee	Posted - 2006.10.13 16:02:00 - [16] Edited by: Jeewee on 13/10/2006 16:02:58 Originally by: Cabadrin Originally by: Jeewee Originally by: Cabadrin Originally by: Jeewee You're welcome... So gimme a link then where they actually tell us what's up with this ! Owned Nothing about lag...just about performance. It's not the same. Originally by: Devblog ownage we have some big batches of hardware coming from IBM over the next months, resulting in more than 30 servers being added to Tranquility (that's 60 more nodes). Originally by: Devblog ownage Yeah, we continue to fix and deploy hotfixes to Tranquility. Often, these are fixes which you shouldn't really notice, where we're gaining small performance here or addressing a certain issue there, but we also deploy tools. Owned again! Lag is not mentioned at all in that post... Gimme another one...
Cabadrin Caldari Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2006.10.13 16:03:00 - [17] Originally by: Jeewee "Wanting" yes, but it didn't solve it last time more hardware was added. We'll all have to live with it, i agree, but all i asked was some to the point reference or whatever to the problem... Because of some replies to my simple question this turns into a rant thread...pathetic actually. Ask a stupid question ... _______________________________________________
Jeewee	Posted - 2006.10.13 16:06:00 - [18] Go on... LOL
Hagia Sophia	Posted - 2006.10.13 16:15:00 - [19] Remember this is a massive multiplayer game. Lag is a major killer to games in this genre. It means nothing to the subscription base how many people are currently on, if those peeps can not interact with one another. This game is built around PVP and player interaction and if it can not sustain this then we need to ask why. I give ccp a big thumb up for EVE and all they have done over the years, but I must admit if lag causes you to loss isk and ships a player has the right to ask why! I support CCP for proactively looking into the problem; I just ask that they realize that this issue is on the minds of many players and these players run corps that keeps the market and game alive.
Niccolado Starwalker Syncore Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.10.13 16:16:00 - [20] Originally by: Jeewee Go on... LOL /hands Jeewee a tech 2 flamesuit here, you will need it with this attitude If you cared about reading the posts on these foums you would see that a lot of the dev blogs and most of the threads players post about are about the evergoing lag. And even more of the answers given by the devs are on these topics. Im getting tired really. Please READ the forums for a change! And you will get your answers instead of making the 100.001 post on this topic.
Dannek Llama F5 and Associates	Posted - 2006.10.13 16:16:00 - [21] Y'know, this isn't like you just throw a switch and the lag goes away. There are underlying engineering issue with making concurrent interaction between THAT many independent user agents run even remotely smooth. Suppose you've got I dunno, 100 variables about a player that have to be in memory at any given time. In combat, the system is paying attention to... I dunno, let's say 15, maybe more depending on what sort of equipment you're using. Given what I've been seeing while playing against NPCs, there's probablly about 20 changes to state besides locational information per minute. So, look at that and you've got about 300 potential interaction per player per minute already. With a 40 man battle, that turns into 12,000. A lot of these variables are going to have to have synchornization to ensure that you don't have a variable in an inconsistent state. On top of that, there are going to be a number of database calls that are going to have to go out when people get blown the hell up. Now, those can probablly be cached in most instances to save time, but I don't know the specifics of the architecture. On top of that, consider all the other crap that's happening on the node you're having your battle on. Now, what does all that mumbo jumbo mean to you, the player? Precisely Jack and ****. You're paying CCP to take care of all that crap. But that doesn't stop it from being about as close to rocket science as you can get in Computer Programming without having a NASA building entry card. You'll have to bear with them while they bend the very laws of math and science. -------------------------------------------------------- Working towards my own personal Dreadnought, one ISK at a time.
Andrue Amarr	Posted - 2006.10.13 16:18:00 - [22] Originally by: Darius Shakor Players find 10 vs 10 laggy. Devs fix it so 10 vs 10 is nice and smoothe. One side decided to outblob the other so it is 20 vs 10. Other side brings 20 next time too making other side bring 30... well you get the picture. Shortly there after they hit the lag wall again and fill the forums with complaints. Yup - there's probably a technical name for it. It's a very widespread phenomena. One classic example is the saying "you can never have too much money". Anyone that works for a living and has experienced the all too temporary joy of a pay rise knows about this. It can also be seen in the computer industry. The latest game is always ever so slightly pushing the boundaries of ability and when the new hardware comes out another latest game is just around the corner. c'est la vie. -- (Battle hardened industrialist) [Brackley, UK] Linux is only free if your time is worthless
Lo3d3R Implant Liberation Front Pirate Coalition	Posted - 2006.10.13 16:20:00 - [23] pod fluid still not warm when eject from ibis... read all about it ___________________ Eating Chopped Bear:
Locke DieDrake Human Information Virus	Posted - 2006.10.13 16:23:00 - [24] Originally by: Darius Shakor Not to pass the book but do you think this will ever get fixed at all? Half of the problem is player created too you know. Players find 10 vs 10 laggy. Devs fix it so 10 vs 10 is nice and smoothe. One side decided to outblob the other so it is 20 vs 10. Other side brings 20 next time too making other side bring 30... well you get the picture. Shortly there after they hit the lag wall again and fill the forums with complaints. Devs work on a new fix, more hardware, better load balancing etc. So now 50 vs 50 is ok until we hit 100 vs 100. How many players in a fleet should CCP cater for? 200, 300, 500? No matter how much they help the lag situation, players will bring more to the fight until they hit lag again. And the fact that the player base expands constantly and adds more people to it, this will always be a problem. So think on this: Try playing a 40 vs 40 on the 2003 server with an old version of eve. See how much worse it is than today. Then realise that CCP do make improvements all the while, but increasing numbers of players means the job will never be done. Ohh and they won't admit it as well, because that is never a good image to hand to the paying customer. Especially when they know it isn't true. But no MMOG out there doesn't have lag when you get a large number of players in a small space so eve will never be the exception. So, what would you like them to do about it? You weren't playing 2k3 were you? I did, briefly, and it wasn't uncommon to have 100v100 fights go on without major lag. The current state of fleet battles is actually WORSE than it has been thruout the history of EVE. ___________________________________________ The deeper you stick it in your vein, the deeper the thoughts there's no more pain. ___________________________________________
Le Donkey	Posted - 2006.10.13 17:00:00 - [25] Originally by: Locke DieDrake Originally by: Darius Shakor Not to pass the book but do you think this will ever get fixed at all? Half of the problem is player created too you know. Players find 10 vs 10 laggy. Devs fix it so 10 vs 10 is nice and smoothe. One side decided to outblob the other so it is 20 vs 10. Other side brings 20 next time too making other side bring 30... well you get the picture. Shortly there after they hit the lag wall again and fill the forums with complaints. Devs work on a new fix, more hardware, better load balancing etc. So now 50 vs 50 is ok until we hit 100 vs 100. How many players in a fleet should CCP cater for? 200, 300, 500? No matter how much they help the lag situation, players will bring more to the fight until they hit lag again. And the fact that the player base expands constantly and adds more people to it, this will always be a problem. So think on this: Try playing a 40 vs 40 on the 2003 server with an old version of eve. See how much worse it is than today. Then realise that CCP do make improvements all the while, but increasing numbers of players means the job will never be done. Ohh and they won't admit it as well, because that is never a good image to hand to the paying customer. Especially when they know it isn't true. But no MMOG out there doesn't have lag when you get a large number of players in a small space so eve will never be the exception. So, what would you like them to do about it? You weren't playing 2k3 were you? I did, briefly, and it wasn't uncommon to have 100v100 fights go on without major lag. The current state of fleet battles is actually WORSE than it has been thruout the history of EVE. That's exactly what I was thinking... it's slowly but steadily getting much much worse... My trusty old 56k modem served me just fine at 50vs50's back at 2003 And I'm sure we all got better connections since then... so meh
Larz63 Caldari Penumbra Squadron Center for Disease Creation	Posted - 2006.10.13 18:07:00 - [26] Originally by: Jeewee Even fights of 40vs40 create tramendous lag. What makes it so difficult for CCP to solve the lag problem and focus on that for a while ? I haven't noticed any difference compared to when CCP claimed they were going to actually do something about the lag problem. What did I miss ? Is it still being investigated ? Do we know what causes the lag (again) ? Is there any way to solve it ? It's getting annoying...again. The only way to fix it is to upgrade from hamsters to Chinchilla's. Or the could goto T2 Hamsters on roids, but then you have to worry about them going crazy and causing more damage then good. Any of you ever seen a hamster with roid rage? It's not pretty. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ather Ialeas Amarr	Posted - 2006.10.13 18:18:00 - [27] I've been thinking of bumping one of my old suggestions (I think it's like 6 months old or so) because of posts like this... What i suggested back then was actual gang size limits and limits on how many people can enter one system (based on in which alliance the player is and system sovereignity mostly). I got flamed back then and I know I'd get flamed now if I seriously walked towards with that suggestion of mine but as far as I know there's no other way to avoid node crashing than limiting the amount of participants at least on some level.
Lord Frost Minmatar The Crystal Method	Posted - 2006.10.13 19:33:00 - [28] Edited by: Lord Frost on 13/10/2006 19:33:55 Originally by: Major Stormer No, Thank YOU for the 100000th post on this topic. No, thank you for the 1 billionth post on posts about degrading people for making 100000 posts. Can't you forum *****s just STFU if you can't say anything relating to the topic. Bite your flippin' tongue... and shut up. You see, you made me stoop to your pathetic level. GOSH ALMIGHTY
Locke DieDrake Human Information Virus	Posted - 2006.10.13 19:37:00 - [29] Originally by: Ather Ialeas I've been thinking of bumping one of my old suggestions (I think it's like 6 months old or so) because of posts like this... What i suggested back then was actual gang size limits and limits on how many people can enter one system (based on in which alliance the player is and system sovereignity mostly). I got flamed back then and I know I'd get flamed now if I seriously walked towards with that suggestion of mine but as far as I know there's no other way to avoid node crashing than limiting the amount of participants at least on some level. From the player side of things, this is true. But CCP could fix the node crash problem in 48 hours if they really wanted to. As it is, they are. Adding 60 new nodes to the server that AFAIK only has 72 to begin with is a HUGE bump. And should bring us back to the days when we could actually have decent sized fleet fights. That of course doesn't address the issue of fleet fights being crappy because of focused fire and a lack of a good logistics support system that can be used in combat. ___________________________________________ The deeper you stick it in your vein, the deeper the thoughts there's no more pain. ___________________________________________

Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.