EVE Search - Wow! that grid!

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Wow! that grid!

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Cardano Firesnake Section XIII Tau Ceti Federation 176	Posted - 2015.03.13 15:40:26 - [1] - Quote I was fighting when my ennemy disapeared. Then he came back again. I was just at 5km of the end of the grid. I don't know why the grid work like that but it is really awful. Isn't it possible to change that now? The grid couldn't simply be 500km around each ship? Posted - 2010.07.01 11:24:00 - [4] Erase learning skills, remap all SP. That's all.
Paranoid Loyd 4145	Posted - 2015.03.13 15:44:20 - [2] - Quote Born 2008, 2700 kills, doesn't know about grid-fu. "Gankers are just other players, not supernatural monsters who will get you if you don't follow some arbitrary superstition. Haul responsibly and without irrational fear." Masao Kurata Fix the Prospect!!!
Reina Xyaer Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic 41	Posted - 2015.03.13 16:00:25 - [3] - Quote Paranoid Loyd wrote: Born 2008, 2700 kills, doesn't know about grid-fu. His point is still extremely valid you troll Time to remove the "grid" from EVE.
Agondray Avenger Mercenaries VOID Intergalactic Forces 234	Posted - 2015.03.13 16:05:44 - [4] - Quote Reina Xyaer wrote: Paranoid Loyd wrote: Born 2008, 2700 kills, doesn't know about grid-fu. His point is still extremely valid you troll Time to remove the "grid" from EVE. and with the capability to snipe even longer ranges ranges because my tempest is stuck at 249.99kms for range no matter how many sensor boosters are on it "Sarcasm is the Recourse of a weak mind." -Dr. Smith
Mournful Conciousness Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate 844	Posted - 2015.03.13 16:07:38 - [5] - Quote As a software developer, if I was asked to remove the localisation of object management in a massively multiplayer distributed system (a.k.a. the grid) I would struggle to imagine how I was going to track the millions of individual objects in eve space in anything like real time. If I were asked to improve the grid proximity and merging code... that would be simple. Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Paranoid Loyd 4146	Posted - 2015.03.13 16:16:22 - [6] - Quote Reina Xyaer wrote: Paranoid Loyd wrote: Born 2008, 2700 kills, doesn't know about grid-fu. His point is still extremely valid you troll Time to remove the "grid" from EVE. Just because you don't agree with me doesn't mean I'm a troll. If you know anything about how idiotic saying "time to remove the grid" is you would be perceived as the troll. But I'm gonna go with you don't. "Gankers are just other players, not supernatural monsters who will get you if you don't follow some arbitrary superstition. Haul responsibly and without irrational fear." Masao Kurata Fix the Prospect!!!
xttz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 510	Posted - 2015.03.13 16:19:47 - [7] - Quote Reina Xyaer wrote: Paranoid Loyd wrote: Born 2008, 2700 kills, doesn't know about grid-fu. His point is still extremely valid you troll Time to remove the "grid" from EVE. Remove all grids, walk in stations forever! Wait, why won't this door open...?
Reina Xyaer Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic 42	Posted - 2015.03.13 16:36:07 - [8] - Quote Paranoid Loyd wrote: Reina Xyaer wrote: Paranoid Loyd wrote: Born 2008, 2700 kills, doesn't know about grid-fu. His point is still extremely valid you troll Time to remove the "grid" from EVE. Just because you don't agree with me doesn't mean I'm a troll. If you know anything about how idiotic saying "time to remove the grid" is you would be perceived as the troll. But I'm gonna go with you don't. You're not a troll because I disagree, you're a troll because your comment is just trying to be snarky and condescending, instead of actually responding to the concept. It's not idiotic, it's what we should be striving for. Quote: and with the capability to snipe even longer ranges ranges because my tempest is stuck at 249.99kms for range no matter how many sensor boosters are on it. but in reality the grid being centered around each ship isn't feasible as you would have lots of grids overlap on things like undocks and massive fights. im sure that would cause a massive server problem. in reality all games have a grid because you can only see something for so far rather its people on a land based mmorpg or a ship in space Quote: As a software developer, if I was asked to remove the localisation of object management in a massively multiplayer distributed system (a.k.a. the grid) I would struggle to imagine how I was going to track the millions of individual objects in eve space in anything like real time. If I were asked to improve the grid proximity and merging code... that would be simple. What's to stop the "grid" from being the whole system? You lack imagination.
Paranoid Loyd 4146	Posted - 2015.03.13 16:42:15 - [9] - Quote You lack understanding of bandwidth and processing power. "Gankers are just other players, not supernatural monsters who will get you if you don't follow some arbitrary superstition. Haul responsibly and without irrational fear." Masao Kurata Fix the Prospect!!!
Reina Xyaer Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic 43	Posted - 2015.03.13 17:05:22 - [10] - Quote Paranoid Loyd wrote: Reina Xyaer wrote: You lack imagination. You lack understanding of bandwidth and processing power. Not to mention legacy code. I must, because I fail to see how just changing the game to X,Y coordinates over the entire system would be any harder than having the system divided up into "grids". Currently, the server still records where you are in system. All the grid does is determine if you can see something on your overview. Why can we not just do away with the grids and have each ship have a max "view distance" that lets them either see something a certain distance away, or not see it. "Legacy code"... yes, the code that I'm suggesting be CHANGED. "Omg that code can't be changed because it is already the way it is" - You
Mournful Conciousness Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate 845	Posted - 2015.03.13 17:11:38 - [11] - Quote Reina Xyaer wrote: What's to stop the "grid" from being the whole system? You lack imagination. I have to admit that in my 30-year career as a software developer you are the first person to accuse me of "lacking imagination". I'm usually accused of "trying to push the boundaries of computing too far", and the high points of that career have been proving these naysayers wrong. However, to answer the specific question. Every single object you see (and don't see) in space in an eve system has to be tracked. Every asteroid, jet can, wreck, drone, missile group, smart bomb... you get the picture. If it has the remotest chance of interacting with another object then this relationship must be tested for. In order to reduce the number of interactions checked (e.g. collisions) the logical thing to do is to reduce the number of tests that must be performed. By logically placing each object in its own little sphere of influence (grid) it means that the server code is freed from the burden of dynamically determining which interactions have occurred, which ones may occur and which ones never will. If all objects were on one mega-grid then (for example) every ship would need to be tested for collision against every other, every frame. The vast majority of these collision checks would be redundant. In addition, the position, orientation, velocity etc of every single ship would need to be communicated to your client, every tick. And then your client would need to figure out which ships to show you. It could discount (say) every ship that was beyond the horizon of your vision, but it would have to perform a calculation (involving taking the square root of squares) every frame refresh. All of this unnecessary work can be completely eliminated by splitting up the system into 'volumes of interaction' (grids) and each grid can then be computed separately (and in parallel!). Only information about items in your grid need be communicated to your client - saving bandwidth and preventing lag, whinging and crying players. The only complication with this system is when two adjacent grids grow to the point where events in one could influence events in another (smart bombs, ships moving from one to the other, etc). Relative positions of grids is simply a matter of computing the intersection of bounding spheres (simple maths). When two grids collide the contents of both could be dumped into a new bigger grid. There would be a moment of lag while it all figured itself out, but not too big a deal - it only happens rarely. So rarely in fact that I suspect the dev team figure that it's a problem that does not need a solution. Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Paranoid Loyd 4148	Posted - 2015.03.13 17:15:58 - [12] - Quote Reina Xyaer wrote: "Omg that code can't be changed because it is already the way it is" - You I never said this, I am simply pointing out you are arguing it is a simple change when the reality it is far from that. "Gankers are just other players, not supernatural monsters who will get you if you don't follow some arbitrary superstition. Haul responsibly and without irrational fear." Masao Kurata Fix the Prospect!!!
Bronson Hughes The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration 1490	Posted - 2015.03.13 17:51:45 - [13] - Quote Reina Xyaer wrote: What's to stop the "grid" from being the whole system? You lack imagination. Imagine, if you will, any large scale battle in sov nullsec where the grid slows to a grinding halt under heavy TiDi. Now, imagine that the grid was the entire system and the server had to deal with every ship, collider, missile, NPC, POS shield, smartbomb, stealth bomber bomb in that system at the same time. If the existing hardware and network bandwidth can't handle packed grids, how precisely do you propose that they handle entire systems without subdividing them into unique grids? I will concede that "grid-fu" is a thing, and that it could likely be reduced by using more creative grid boundary definitions, but doing away with grids entirely is simply not realistic given current hardware and bandwidth limitations. My Many Misadventures Reading Comprehension: so important it deserves it's own skillbook. I seek to create content, not become content.
Colette Kassia Kassia Industrial Supply 96	Posted - 2015.03.13 17:52:43 - [14] - Quote I think that some kind of "working grid" will always exist under the hood. What we want is to not see any evidence of its existence. This mean identifying the maximum range that two ships can be relevant to each other and growing the grid as needed. It also means checking if two nearby grids (in global coordinate-space terms) are starting to approach each other and, if needed, merging them. You just only inform the client about things that are within their visual range.
Reina Xyaer Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic 43	Posted - 2015.03.13 17:59:00 - [15] - Quote Colette Kassia wrote: I think that some kind of "working grid" will always exist under the hood. What we want is to not see any evidence of its existence. This mean identifying the maximum range that two ships can be relevant to each other and growing the grid as needed. It also means checking if two nearby grids (in global coordinate-space terms) are starting to approach each other and, if needed, merging them. You just only inform the client about things that are within their visual range. This.
Lienzo Amanuensis 50	Posted - 2015.03.13 18:27:30 - [16] - Quote I like having a fog of war. If the grid was restricted to a certain number of objects, then you could still have a massive fleet fight, but you would all be fighting different groups of targets unless you actually reposition yourself across the field. If you were in an anomaly, or a vast belt, it would shrink down the field of awareness of both hunter and hunted. How to allow the player to see both the stars and have a limited draw range of objects is an aesthetically challenging task. Other games can get away with using the landscape. Perhaps EVE could get away with having a more limited HUD overlay range, and then have objects continually shrink over distance until the single point winks out of the differentiable resolution limit of our sensors.
Lugh Crow-Slave 868	Posted - 2015.03.13 19:03:43 - [17] - Quote i feel the current grid system is fine(not perfict but about as good as they can get with current tech) however i would like the max targeting range to lose its hard cap so i can lock past 250km Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3?
Kabark Schilden 47	Posted - 2015.03.13 21:26:51 - [18] - Quote Agondray wrote: Reina Xyaer wrote: Paranoid Loyd wrote: Born 2008, 2700 kills, doesn't know about grid-fu. His point is still extremely valid you troll Time to remove the "grid" from EVE. and with the capability to snipe even longer ranges ranges because my tempest is stuck at 249.99kms for range no matter how many sensor boosters are on it. but in reality the grid being centered around each ship isn't feasible as you would have lots of grids overlap on things like undocks and massive fights. im sure that would cause a massive server problem. in reality all games have a grid because you can only see something for so far rather its people on a land based mmorpg or a ship in space I'm just here to support expanding the grid. I love my Rokh. I would love my Rokh even more if I could snipe from 250km to 500km. 1000km grid. Oh please give me a max range of 500km! Oh the sniping potential!
Madd Adda 36	Posted - 2015.03.13 22:16:22 - [19] - Quote I think they limited it partly due to the what the server can handle, but there is the balance issue too. there is what people say above me saying "i want to snipe from 250km+" which is scary enough as is. Carebear extraordinaire
Kabark Schilden 47	Posted - 2015.03.14 00:46:54 - [20] - Quote Madd Adda wrote: I think they limited it partly due to the what the server can handle, but there is the balance issue too. there is what people say above me saying "i want to snipe from 250km+" which is scary enough as is. I can effectively apply around 300 dps at 250km which is good for rail guns at that distance. I barely have the tracking to hit a cruiser at transverse of 500m/s which is about the limit for rail gun at that range. At 500km you should be able to apply around 100 dps on a battleship sized target moving. Anything smaller and you just couldn't hit. I don't think there is any balance issue with extending the range, only a programming issue.
Lugh Crow-Slave 869	Posted - 2015.03.14 01:20:49 - [21] - Quote Kabark wrote: Agondray wrote: Reina Xyaer wrote: Paranoid Loyd wrote: Born 2008, 2700 kills, doesn't know about grid-fu. His point is still extremely valid you troll Time to remove the "grid" from EVE. and with the capability to snipe even longer ranges ranges because my tempest is stuck at 249.99kms for range no matter how many sensor boosters are on it. but in reality the grid being centered around each ship isn't feasible as you would have lots of grids overlap on things like undocks and massive fights. im sure that would cause a massive server problem. in reality all games have a grid because you can only see something for so far rather its people on a land based mmorpg or a ship in space I'm just here to support expanding the grid. I love my Rokh. I would love my Rokh even more if I could snipe from 250km to 500km. 1000km grid. Oh please give me a max range of 500km! Oh the sniping potential! this has nothing to do with the current grid its a hard lock limit you can get grids out over 2000km Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3?
Gaan Cathal Angry Mustellid The Periphery 39	Posted - 2015.03.14 02:05:34 - [22] - Quote Kabark wrote: Madd Adda wrote: I think they limited it partly due to the what the server can handle, but there is the balance issue too. there is what people say above me saying "i want to snipe from 250km+" which is scary enough as is. I can effectively apply around 300 dps at 250km which is good for rail guns at that distance. I barely have the tracking to hit a cruiser at transverse of 500m/s which is about the limit for rail gun at that range. At 500km you should be able to apply around 100 dps on a battleship sized target moving. Anything smaller and you just couldn't hit. I don't think there is any balance issue with extending the range, only a programming issue. This is completely the reverse of the actual mechanics. The further an object of a given velocity the lower it's transverse velocity and ergo the easier it is to track.
Kabark Schilden 47	Posted - 2015.03.14 03:13:36 - [23] - Quote Gaan Cathal wrote: Kabark wrote: Madd Adda wrote: I think they limited it partly due to the what the server can handle, but there is the balance issue too. there is what people say above me saying "i want to snipe from 250km+" which is scary enough as is. I can effectively apply around 300 dps at 250km which is good for rail guns at that distance. I barely have the tracking to hit a cruiser at transverse of 500m/s which is about the limit for rail gun at that range. At 500km you should be able to apply around 100 dps on a battleship sized target moving. Anything smaller and you just couldn't hit. I don't think there is any balance issue with extending the range, only a programming issue. This is completely the reverse of the actual mechanics. The further an object of a given velocity the lower it's transverse velocity and ergo the easier it is to track. Explain that to my tracking computers. 247km optimal, can hit a cruiser moving at 500m/s at 200km but miss half the shots same senario at 250km.
Colette Kassia Kassia Industrial Supply 97	Posted - 2015.03.14 05:18:00 - [24] - Quote I've noticed that some posters are talking about the 'common simulation volume' and others about 'visual range'. Currently these are synonymous. You can see anything (no cloaked) that is in the same "room' as you, regardless of distance. The talk of removing grids in the thread is really just a suggestion to decouple the two. I support that idea. The maximum distance that you can detect another ship and see them on Overview should be determined by your ships sensor strength (or resolution) and the signature size of the other ship. You should be able to detect a titan from further out than a frigate. And it's fine if some ships can see an object from greater distances than others. It makes some sense that the placement of jet cans, or other objects, may affect the size of the simulation volume. But this increasing your visual range just feels like something in the game design is broken. The technical details of how the server creates the illusion that is simulating a whole solar-system should be totally transparent to the players; and poking at it should not be a component of battle strategy. (This is the vision I had in my mind when I wrote my previous post).
Gaan Cathal Angry Mustellid The Periphery 41	Posted - 2015.03.14 12:50:18 - [25] - Quote Kabark wrote: Explain that to my tracking computers. 247km optimal, can hit a cruiser moving at 500m/s at 200km but miss half the shots same senario at 250km. If you've got an optimal of 247km then that doesn't surprise me, a target at 250km is in falloff and if you don't have much falloff (say, railguns) then it can have a dramatic effect very quickly. That will be what's increasing your miss rate.
Lugh Crow-Slave 869	Posted - 2015.03.14 13:06:33 - [26] - Quote Gaan Cathal wrote: Kabark wrote: Madd Adda wrote: I think they limited it partly due to the what the server can handle, but there is the balance issue too. there is what people say above me saying "i want to snipe from 250km+" which is scary enough as is. I can effectively apply around 300 dps at 250km which is good for rail guns at that distance. I barely have the tracking to hit a cruiser at transverse of 500m/s which is about the limit for rail gun at that range. At 500km you should be able to apply around 100 dps on a battleship sized target moving. Anything smaller and you just couldn't hit. I don't think there is any balance issue with extending the range, only a programming issue. This is completely the reverse of the actual mechanics. The further an object of a given velocity the lower it's transverse velocity and ergo the easier it is to track. not once you realize you are dealing with fall off Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3?
Promiscuous Medusa Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 2	Posted - 2015.03.14 13:31:47 - [27] - Quote 250km, 500km, its all the same when autoprobing lands tackle on you. Why 500 anyway? Is 200 not safe enough? :/
Kabark Schilden 47	Posted - 2015.03.14 17:08:14 - [28] - Quote Promiscuous Medusa wrote: 250km, 500km, its all the same when autoprobing lands tackle on you. Why 500 anyway? Is 200 not safe enough? :/ For the lulz. I've lost a couple snipers to probes but it is tremendous fun to sit 200 off gate and a frig jumps in and doesn't warp off right away. Then realizes he just got locked and poped. But can someone give me a run down on how optimal and falloff work together? Or link the page that explains it. I still don't have a full understanding on how the targeting system works.
LT Alter Dodixie Undock Is Camped 148	Posted - 2015.03.14 17:47:51 - [29] - Quote Reina Xyaer wrote: What's to stop the "grid" from being the whole system? You lack imagination. Legacy code, hardware limitations, client information intake limitation... lots of other reason that I cannot think of because I am not a developer? That comment has completely shown your ineptitude, and ending it with, "You lack imagination." Makes you look the fool rather than him.
Mournful Conciousness Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate 858	Posted - 2015.03.14 18:55:57 - [30] - Quote LT Alter wrote: Reina Xyaer wrote: What's to stop the "grid" from being the whole system? You lack imagination. Legacy code, hardware limitations, client information intake limitation... lots of other reason that I cannot think of because I am not a developer? That comment has completely shown your ineptitude, and ending it with, "You lack imagination." Makes you look the fool rather than him. Thank you for defending me. I appreciate it. If you look 2 comments below his, you'll see that I provided a complete answer (and a rebuttal of the accusation). The devs read these forums but they ignore people who regularly insult each other, so if we are looking for positive change, that's a counterproductive approach. Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Promiscuous Medusa Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 3	Posted - 2015.03.15 21:20:15 - [31] - Quote Kabark wrote: Promiscuous Medusa wrote: 250km, 500km, its all the same when autoprobing lands tackle on you. Why 500 anyway? Is 200 not safe enough? :/ For the lulz. I've lost a couple snipers to probes but it is tremendous fun to sit 200 off gate and a frig jumps in and doesn't warp off right away. Then realizes he just got locked and poped. But can someone give me a run down on how optimal and falloff work together? Or link the page that explains it. I still don't have a full understanding on how the targeting system works. Optimal = 100% DPS Optimal + Falloff = 50% DPS Optimal + 2xFalloff = 0 DPS So 500dps, op 10km, falloff 5km 10km - 500dps 15km - 250dps 20km - 0dps 19.9km - like... 1 dps. Not including all the other factors.
Lugh Crow-Slave 894	Posted - 2015.03.15 21:23:56 - [32] - Quote Promiscuous Medusa wrote: Kabark wrote: Promiscuous Medusa wrote: 250km, 500km, its all the same when autoprobing lands tackle on you. Why 500 anyway? Is 200 not safe enough? :/ For the lulz. I've lost a couple snipers to probes but it is tremendous fun to sit 200 off gate and a frig jumps in and doesn't warp off right away. Then realizes he just got locked and poped. But can someone give me a run down on how optimal and falloff work together? Or link the page that explains it. I still don't have a full understanding on how the targeting system works. Optimal = 100% DPS Optimal + Falloff = 50% DPS Optimal + 2xFalloff = 0 DPS So 500dps, op 10km, falloff 5km 10km - 500dps 15km - 250dps 20km - 0dps 19.9km - like... 1 dps. Not including all the other factors. A bit more info found here if the above didn't help Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3?
Alvatore DiMarco Capricious Endeavours Ltd 3573	Posted - 2015.03.15 23:49:45 - [33] - Quote Last I heard anything about the matter, the use of Grid-Fu had been deemed an exploit by CCP. If you encounter it in the future and can supply reasonable evidence that your target is aware of and taking advantage of a manipulated grid, it should be reported. Perhaps one day CCP will fix the grid so that it cannot be manipulated in this way, but today is not that day.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 1949	Posted - 2015.03.16 00:09:35 - [34] - Quote Alvatore DiMarco wrote: Last I heard anything about the matter, the use of Grid-Fu had been deemed an exploit by CCP. If you encounter it in the future and can supply reasonable evidence that your target is aware of and taking advantage of a manipulated grid, it should be reported. Perhaps one day CCP will fix the grid so that it cannot be manipulated in this way, but today is not that day. I believe it's more exactly grid boundary use? To bounce 100m back over a boundary to cause all locks to drop and escape, or lay a massive trap. Not general grid fu to extend or shape a grid.
Cardano Firesnake Section XIII Tau Ceti Federation 177	Posted - 2015.03.16 11:48:04 - [35] - Quote I know the grid problems since a long time ago. It is not the first time It hapens to me. But I still don't find it OK. I don't mind how, but this should be fix. And the fact is that neither me or my openent did this grid modification on purpose. I don't even understand what happened as I just put a bubble @ 100km from a gate and engaged there. Posted - 2010.07.01 11:24:00 - [4] Erase learning skills, remap all SP. That's all.
Caphriel Airuta Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 0	Posted - 2015.03.16 12:22:40 - [36] - Quote Mournful Conciousness wrote: LT Alter wrote: Reina Xyaer wrote: What's to stop the "grid" from being the whole system? You lack imagination. Legacy code, hardware limitations, client information intake limitation... lots of other reason that I cannot think of because I am not a developer? That comment has completely shown your ineptitude, and ending it with, "You lack imagination." Makes you look the fool rather than him. Thank you for defending me. I appreciate it. If you look 2 comments below his, you'll see that I provided a complete answer (and a rebuttal of the accusation). The devs read these forums but they ignore people who regularly insult each other, so if we are looking for positive change, that's a counterproductive approach. You're the hero this forum needs, but doesn't deserve. Would you say that increased server power and efficiency improvements could possibly allow for the fix you postulated with minimal lag at this stage?
Mournful Conciousness Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate 864	Posted - 2015.03.16 18:14:40 - [37] - Quote Caphriel Airuta wrote: Mournful Conciousness wrote: LT Alter wrote: Reina Xyaer wrote: What's to stop the "grid" from being the whole system? You lack imagination. Legacy code, hardware limitations, client information intake limitation... lots of other reason that I cannot think of because I am not a developer? That comment has completely shown your ineptitude, and ending it with, "You lack imagination." Makes you look the fool rather than him. Thank you for defending me. I appreciate it. If you look 2 comments below his, you'll see that I provided a complete answer (and a rebuttal of the accusation). The devs read these forums but they ignore people who regularly insult each other, so if we are looking for positive change, that's a counterproductive approach. You're the hero this forum needs, but doesn't deserve. Would you say that increased server power and efficiency improvements could possibly allow for the fix you postulated with minimal lag at this stage? The ability to merge two overlapping grids, or to allow grids (and target locks) at extreme range should have almost no impact on server load, for two reasons: a) The grid merge is a once-only operation. In effect it would be transferring the contexts of both grids in a third new one and then destroying the two old ones. All players would experience some lag (similar to emerging from a gate) and that would be it. I suspect the vast majority of that pause would be the time it takes to communicate the new grid layout down to all interested clients, and for the client at the end of the slowest connection to confirm that the grid has been received (to keep it fair). b) Server load is a function of the number of nearby objects being tracked, not their distances. Computing and communicating the co-ordinate set for three spaceships would take the same time whether they were 100km or 100,000 km apart. The nature of floating-point arithmetic is such that the computations take the same time but become less accurate as the scale of the numbers grow (but we're talking some very big numbers for that to begin to matter). Of course there is a caveat: If we were to allow grids to grow, and players had sufficient time, we'd also have to allow them to break up at some point - there's always going to be a limit as to how big they can reasonably be allowed to get, otherwise determined players could conceivably zoom off in different directions in overclocked frigates and spend a few weeks making a ridiculously large grid. Server downtime might be a good time to detect these candidates and compute the breakoff points. This would probably be a good project for a Summer Intern at CCP, if they have such things. Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Reina Xyaer Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic 60	Posted - 2015.03.17 00:18:02 - [38] - Quote LT Alter wrote: Reina Xyaer wrote: What's to stop the "grid" from being the whole system? You lack imagination. Legacy code, hardware limitations, client information intake limitation... lots of other reason that I cannot think of because I am not a developer? That comment has completely shown your ineptitude, and ending it with, "You lack imagination." Makes you look the fool rather than him. Completely hollow arguments. Legacy Code? Again... code can be updated. That is the EXACT definition of making a change to a game. Hardware limitations? I doubt it. EVE servers running everything they currently do, but then they can't compute "object within X range? yes=ongrid, no=offgrid Client information intake limitation? Seriously? Do you use made up things like that at work to impress your boss? "Well Sir, as you can see here by the synergetic emergent information protocol..." idiot. The EVE clients get sent the info for 1000vs1000 man fleet battles, and you think it would be impossible to send them the data from objects 1000km away instead of 400km away? Completely shown my ineptitude, right. This comment completely shows your need to troll the forums and make things up to argue against ideas you don't like for no reason. Me: "Remove (or make seamless) the grid because it's a silly mechanic that has no place in a 3D space sim." You: "No that's stupid and you're stupid because that's impossible to do with EVE's current code (which I admittedly have no idea how it works because I'm 'not a developer')" Don't go calling people "inept" if you're arguments are baseless and almost certainly wrong.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 1951	Posted - 2015.03.17 00:25:05 - [39] - Quote Actually most of us do have a very good idea how EVE's current grid code works. Because it works in a logical coherent fashion designed to prevent lag. And your proposal to remove grids is terrible as it would mean vast amounts more lag. Could grids be made to be able to merge. Now that is possible in theory, but it certainly isn't a summer intern project. I don't want some new programmer who doesn't care about their long term job hacking out some monkey code on a system which is utterly integral to the base gameplay of everyone no matter what activity they do. Are the very few edge cases it's likely to deal with worth changing the grid code fundamentally for and the Dev hours involved in that project, most likely not.
Reina Xyaer Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic 61	Posted - 2015.03.17 00:48:01 - [40] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: Actually most of us do have a very good idea how EVE's current grid code works. Oh really buddy? Please explain. I'm honestly interested in hearing how you think EVE's code works. Nevyn Auscent wrote: Because it works in a logical coherent fashion designed to prevent lag. And your proposal to remove grids is terrible as it would mean vast amounts more lag. Oh really? Please explain... seriously, in depth. Tell me why it would mean vast amounts more lag. Utter hogwash. I say: baseless claims. You have no idea what you're talking about. Neither do I, but at least I don't claim to.
Lienzo Amanuensis 51	Posted - 2015.03.17 04:39:13 - [41] - Quote I kinda liked how PS2's fog of war system worked. If you sat behind 200 of your allies, you wouldn't see any of the enemy. To do that, you actually had to skirt around to either the side of your own forces, or preferably behind the enemy front. It helped distinguish the marginally competent from the clueless. EVE does rather benefit from the ability to position your ewar behind your main damage dealers though. Any mechanic that rewards constant repositioning on the battlefield is good in my opinion. I'd even accept unlimited locking range if a pre-requisite of that was the farther away something was, the longer it would take to lock, preferably on a non-linear curve. It would be kinda interesting if you had just two frigates on a grid, and because of that the grid naturally reached as far as 5000km. If inties can routinely do 5km/s, that's a couple minutes chase time, rather than the current fifty seconds. Imagine how massive the asteroid belts could be if you are there in just a tiny group. It would be interesting if it was actually possible to be far enough away that the hud didn't even render, or to have a natural limit on the overview beyond that range. A ship that was actually just a tiny dot moving against the background might actually have a good chance of warping in on a particular roid to pounce on a target.
Daide Vondrichnov SnaiLs aNd FroGs 29	Posted - 2015.03.17 06:58:05 - [42] - Quote Reina Xyaer wrote: Paranoid Loyd wrote: Born 2008, 2700 kills, doesn't know about grid-fu. His point is still extremely valid you troll Time to remove the "grid" from EVE. They can't remove those problems, as the devs which have coded this system is gonne and nobody know how it works and are afraid of doing ****.
Mournful Conciousness Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate 865	Posted - 2015.03.17 07:11:59 - [43] - Quote Reina Xyaer wrote: Nevyn Auscent wrote: Actually most of us do have a very good idea how EVE's current grid code works. Oh really buddy? Please explain. I'm honestly interested in hearing how you think EVE's code works. Nevyn Auscent wrote: Because it works in a logical coherent fashion designed to prevent lag. And your proposal to remove grids is terrible as it would mean vast amounts more lag. Oh really? Please explain... seriously, in depth. Tell me why it would mean vast amounts more lag. Utter hogwash. I say: baseless claims. You have no idea what you're talking about. Neither do I, but at least I don't claim to. His claims are expressed in terse terms but they are not baseless. Here's a slightly more verbose treatment: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5578438#post5578438 Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Reina Xyaer Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic 62	Posted - 2015.03.17 14:19:45 - [44] - Quote Mournful Conciousness wrote: Reina Xyaer wrote: Nevyn Auscent wrote: Actually most of us do have a very good idea how EVE's current grid code works. Oh really buddy? Please explain. I'm honestly interested in hearing how you think EVE's code works. Nevyn Auscent wrote: Because it works in a logical coherent fashion designed to prevent lag. And your proposal to remove grids is terrible as it would mean vast amounts more lag. Oh really? Please explain... seriously, in depth. Tell me why it would mean vast amounts more lag. Utter hogwash. I say: baseless claims. You have no idea what you're talking about. Neither do I, but at least I don't claim to. His claims are expressed in terse terms but they are not baseless. Here's a slightly more verbose treatment: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5578438#post5578438 I already read that, and it doesn't convince me for a second that the code can't be changed to handle grids differently. All we're asking for here... is that when someone flies to the "edge" of the grid, that edge is moved so that there are no invisible walls in space. Give every ship a "view distance", and anything within that distance is shown on the overview. (ships and objects, of course celestials are always on overview). Some of you say this can't be done "because of grids", well change the grid system. How or why would you argue against this?
Mournful Conciousness Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate 865	Posted - 2015.03.17 14:35:46 - [45] - Quote No-one is arguing that what you want is a bad idea. It's obviously a good idea. Grids already do become very large when they need to, but I think everyone is is agreement that it could be done in a more pleasing way. Certainly, tactical gameplay would improve if we could target lock, approach etc from beyond 250km. What I was hoping to point out was the need for a grid in some form for reasons of bandwidth and preventing redundant computation that certainly would hamper people's enjoyment if there were no grids. This was in response to someone saying "why not put everything in the system into one grid?", which is admittedly tangential to the central point of the OP. Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".

Pages: 1 2 :: [one 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.