| Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Vetur
   |
Posted - 2006.12.11 21:31:00 -
[1]
I've been saying it in-game, and yes, I'm sure people are sick of hearing me whining on. It's heretical flame-bait, too, so I know I deserve what I'm bound to get here. But...
We've all been impressed with EVE's ever-increasing peak concurrent user figure. The MMO world has been rocked at the stunning achievement, I'm sure. Everquest and World of Warcraft can only look on in awe.
But seriously, CCP, isn't it time you rested on your laurels now? You've made your point: you've managed to get more people online on a single server than any other game ever. By a long, long way, too. Your record's safe for a while, no doubt - and even when and if it's broken, you still got there first. But - and maybe this is just my impression as someone who doesn't understand the technicalities behind the whole thing - I get the distinct impression Tranquility's starting to creak under the strain. Traffic control queues, from what I can gather, are a symptom of this. And because of the node setup the queues don't even make logical sense: more than once I've been held for five or ten minutes to access systems that proved to have a tiny handful of pilots in them. There's chaos in Jita - every other line in the Help channel seems to be making that point - and numerous other systems are becoming nightmares to navigate. But of course we all know about these issues.
I realise I'm uneducated on this; I'm not even what you'd call a 'hardcore' player - so I'm quite prepared to accept that I just don't know what I'm talking about. But really, is there a reason why the game can't and shouldn't be sharded at this point? I've been playing casually for a good few years now, and the game and its economy worked perfectly well a year ago when we had half the PCU level. So is there something to be gained - something tangible - from continuing to insist on remaining on a single server? |
Kharakan
Amarr
Morticus Impendium
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 21:34:00 -
[2]
No, there isn't a reason. There's many reasons and I'm sure the people who are probably following will be happy to post them 
 Originally by: Joshua Foiritain (to Dark Shikari)
HAHAHA I KNOW YOUR ACCOUUNT NAME TIME TO DIE
this signature space is claimed in the name of eris, haha I got to him first. neeneer
|
Bigoleed
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 21:37:00 -
[3]
A second server would probably break EVE as we know it. I'm not sure if this is the sole reason they aren't doing it - or if it is the profit model/magins that prevent them from supporting a second cluster.
|
Cmdr Sy
Appetite 4 Destruction
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 21:40:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Vetur
So is there something to be gained - something tangible - from continuing to insist on remaining on a single server?
Yeah. One world - no escape. It is the invisible founding block of all EVE politics.
It ensures that the rise and fall of entities' fortunes causes a continual reshuffling of the political map, rather than pieces deciding to secede to another server.
|
Insidi Us
Amarr
The Imperial Commonwealth
The Sundering
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 21:44:00 -
[5]
The thing I love about a single server is player accountability. Last thing we need is some server A idiot coming to server B and leaving his or her reputation at the door.
-----------
|
w0rmy
Intensive CareBearz
Imperium Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 21:46:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Bigoleed
A second server would probably break EVE as we know it. I'm not sure if this is the sole reason they aren't doing it
It wouldnt break EVE 
Eve china anyone?
Originally by: Avon
Originally by: Dark Shikari
What single item is larger than a jetcan?
My ego?
|
Cmdr Sy
Appetite 4 Destruction
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 21:49:00 -
[7]
Originally by: w0rmy
Originally by: Bigoleed
A second server would probably break EVE as we know it. I'm not sure if this is the sole reason they aren't doing it
It wouldnt break EVE
Eve china anyone?
Eh, you forget that there is no migration between the two. Otherwise it's "Damn, we just lost Tribute, never mind, let's all move over to the server where we still own it."
|
Danton Marcellus
Nebula Rasa Holdings
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 21:52:00 -
[8]
Originally by: w0rmy
Originally by: Bigoleed
A second server would probably break EVE as we know it. I'm not sure if this is the sole reason they aren't doing it
It wouldnt break EVE
Eve china anyone?
The good thing about EVE China is that it's never coming here, just put it out of your mind and even forget it exists as anything but a cashcow for CCP to get us expensive upgrades with.
Sharded games hold no real appeal to me, could be them all having level systems...
The one server is what's really keeping me interested, the other games have to catch up, not EVE step down.
Ourselves Alone |
Niccolado Starwalker
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 21:59:00 -
[9]
Originally by: w0rmy
Originally by: Bigoleed
A second server would probably break EVE as we know it. I'm not sure if this is the sole reason they aren't doing it
It wouldnt break EVE
Eve china anyone?
EVE china is just that. EVE IN China. Not in USA. Not in UK. Not in Norway or iceland or ulan bataar. But in China. Only. And that is of legal reasons. Purely.
EvE +NLINE - T+TALHELLDEATH SUPPORTER |
Kvarium Ki
Foresights
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 22:20:00 -
[10]
All they have to do is offer a one time character transfer from the original server to the new one. After a period of a month or so after the opening of the new server no more characters could be transfered.
With the skill training system of EVE people would not want to start over from scratch with a new character on a different server.
I want more server(s) and less lag, I liked it when we had 8-10k players on. Worked great.
KK.
|
Nero Scuro
Caldari
Murder of Crows
E N I G M A
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 22:32:00 -
[11]
I like having 30k (or more people) on one server. I do not like having them all in empire (nevermind all in one system).
Maybe a reshuffling of server priorities is in order? I remember reading that not even half the hardware is currently in use at any one time.
___
Signature removed for inappropriate content - please contact [email protected] if you have any questions - Jacques
The world isn't going to end; we're not that lucky... |
Fink Angel
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 22:36:00 -
[12]
No, no, you clearly don't understand.
We're adding extra hardware, that will fix the problem
We're removing bookmarks, that will fix the problem
The Revelations code is optimised, that will fix the problem
Oh, erm, we'll have to get back to you.
|
Cornelius Murphy
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 22:43:00 -
[13]
Whether its one server, or multi, one thing is for sure. Whoever introduced Traffic Control should be tortured, in public, slowly, and very painfully.
(Just my opinion, not that of my corp )
------------------------------------------
|
Jim McGregor
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 22:44:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Cornelius Murphy
(Just my opinion, not that of my corp )
Jesus, why do people keep writing this... who in their right mind think people speak for their entire corp when they say something? 
---
Eve Wiki | Eve Tribune | Eve Pirate |
Cornelius Murphy
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 22:45:00 -
[15]
I fear my leaders
------------------------------------------
|
Merchantigus
Minmatar
Riot Zone
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 22:46:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Merchantigus on 11/12/2006 22:46:37
Originally by: Vetur
stuff tangible - from continuing to insist on remaining on a single server?
Dooms day nub post #4326. keep it up and someday there will be more of these than s*****rdly pod kills 
The problem right now is jita and the people to daft to just move that would rather sit here and start "eve is doomed!11" or "i logged in jita and there is a que?!1!1" post instead of moving a few systems over.
before i totally left that area i was a grand total of 5 jumps from jita and there were no login ques or lag. the only time i get a gate que was the gateway system between regions. since then i've not had anything. no lag. no ques.
MOVE THE **** OUT OF JITA if you don't like the problems you are causing.
"When still up after 30 hours you are type this good you will not mmhmhmmhmmm." |
George Soros
Minmatar
Idiot Arbitrage Inc
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 22:52:00 -
[17]
A new shard can be a whole new section of Eve. New areas that exists parallel to the Eve we know. When the technology catches up - kabbom a wormhole opens up and the two shards meet as one. The game suddenly doubles in scope. A whoooole tray of new alliances to do battle with...
Having said that, I do like the single shard and it's what draws me to this game.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
Dred'Pirate Jesus
Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 22:54:00 -
[18]
OhOhOh! I have an even better idea! Lets make another server just for the proffesional forum whiners.. theres about 20 of them and with alts about 60.. So take a single blade and build a forum and eve shard and let them move to it so we can finally browse the forums in peace..
(This is My view and IAC be dammed about it..  )
KALI:Revelations.. Putting the Waaaa back in Piwat.. |
Merchantigus
Minmatar
Riot Zone
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 22:55:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Merchantigus on 11/12/2006 22:56:40
Originally by: Dred'Pirate Jesus
OhOhOh! I have an even better idea! Lets make another server just for the proffesional forum whiners.. theres about 20 of them and with alts about 60.. So take a single blade and build a forum and eve shard and let them move to it so we can finally browse the forums in peace..
(This is My view and IAC be dammed about it.. )
/signed 
*edit*
also what George Soros said would actually be pretty cool but then it'd be a single server again and we'd need a fleet of whaabulances the size of mars.
"When still up after 30 hours you are type this good you will not mmhmhmmhmmm." |
Roy Batty68
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 23:01:00 -
[20]
I guess one thing that's sort of neat about the single shard approach is that it's pretty much inherently self governing. If CCP does indeed reach that threshold where they can no longer technically support the amount of players logged in concurrently, more than likely enough people will cancel that it will eventually even back out.
See then it just becomes a battle of wills. Whoever can tough out the lag the longest wins.
Originally by: Big Al
Well, if there was a law against stupidity, the server would certainly lag less.
|
Sachi Mai
Amarr
Diligentia Sodalitas
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 23:14:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Vetur
We've all been impressed with EVE's ever-increasing peak concurrent user figure. The MMO world has been rocked at the stunning achievement, I'm sure. Everquest and World of Warcraft can only look on in awe.
Heehee, considering WoW is into the millions of players, have started a tv marketting campaign in the UK and are raking in the cash I think Blizzard really don't care, or are impressed with how many people CCP can run on one shard.
Considering the shard usually falls over and dies fairly quickly after the maximum number is reached, and earlier today the server was capped at 21k.
As for 30+k players on at the sametime, why does it matter? How many of them people are you likely to come across in any given night?
I like Eve, have always liked it for its complexity. Although it went a bit dull for me after castor, I came back and am back to enjoying it. I would much rather they fixed the little annoying problems EvE has rather than concentrating on this upper limit.
Selling Faction ships since, erm 2006. |
Vishnej
Demonic Retribution
Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 23:40:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Fink Angel
No, no, you clearly don't understand.
We're adding extra hardware, that will fix the problem
We're removing bookmarks, that will fix the problem
The Revelations code is optimised, that will fix the problem
Oh, erm, we'll have to get back to you.
IIRC, a 0.0 system, 1V-, reached 600 pilots a few days back.
Improvements have been made, but they don't make Eve infinitely scalable.
|
Admai Sket
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 23:43:00 -
[23]
lol - if there was another server, put ONLY people who are in Jita and other busy systems on one, and the rest of us on the other - then they can sit in their little 1.0 world ****ing and moaning all they want, while the rest of us are free to do whatever without lag. :P
|
Vetur
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 23:46:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Merchantigus
Dooms day nub post #4326. keep it up and someday there will be more of these than s*****rdly pod kills
Well, firstly, I don't herald the doom of EVE intentionally, because I love EVE. I even like the one-server model - my initial question stemmed from the fact that (maybe due to my inadequate understanding of the way the game's hardware works) I see a lot of apparently population-related problems, and an apparently obvious solution that CCP don't seem to want to take. Yes, I like the single server, but if sharding would solve the problems, I'd urge CCP to do it. However, I've seen a lot of interesting comments so far in this thread, and I understand that there are many points of view here. There are reasons for and reasons against - and I'm continuing to read the thread for more.
So, here and now, if it's me you're referring to with all that nonsense above, you can ditch the ill-informed sarcasm. I'm no 'nub': I've been playing for a good couple of years now, and consider myself an experienced, if casual, player. Quote:
The problem right now is jita and the people to daft to just move that would rather sit here and start "eve is doomed!11" or "i logged in jita and there is a que?!1!1" post instead of moving a few systems over.
Yes, brilliant solution, I'm sure, and one size must surely fit all here. Except that I'm not in Jita. I've passed through it once since the patch, but generally I stick to low-population, medium-security systems, and most systems I pass through regularly seem to have between 0-50 players in local whenever I think to look. So how exactly does moving out of Jita solve the problem for me? For that matter, how does it solve it for people whose corp offices or favoured agents are in that system?
The traffic control queues are a problem, not a feature. I hear tell they may be getting removed soon, and if that's the case I won't be sorry to see them go. Quote:
MOVE THE **** OUT OF JITA if you don't like the problems you are causing.
When you can be bothered to A) read what's been said; and B) reply constructively, then I'll be more interested in what you've got to say. |
Vetur
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 23:51:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Sachi Mai
Heehee, considering WoW is into the millions of players, have started a tv marketting campaign in the UK and are raking in the cash I think Blizzard really don't care, or are impressed with how many people CCP can run on one shard.
Right. Conscious of the fact that I've just criticised another poster for being sarcastic, I have to admit my hypocrisy here: this was my point. It really doesn't matter how many people are on one shard at once, and that was really part of the basis for my question. |
Sharupak
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 23:59:00 -
[26]
Jita is bad.
Rens is managable
But really we are talking like what 4 systems? Not that big a deal there. Most every game I have played has 3 or 4 trouble spots.
|
SN3263827
The Black Rabbits
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 00:27:00 -
[27]
Don't be fooled into thinking Traffic Control is somehow the affliction of solely highly populated systems.
I lost a megathron to a gank squad earlier this evening because I was #4 in the queue to jump into an empty 0.0 system for 4 minutes.
Its quite frankly ridiculous, and makes playing the game impossible.
_____________________________________________
|
Viktor Fyretracker
Caldari
Worms Corp
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 00:36:00 -
[28]
EVE has a solid community like Everquest, while i honestly dont support another server for EVE i can say this. never think changing servers can hide a bad rep because in EQ we had ways to follow people and inform the other server what they had coming.
|
DOGNOSH
Minmatar
Rage of Angels
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 00:44:00 -
[29]
I spoke to hellmar(spelling?) the CEO of CCP at fanfest
and I asked this exact question
he said "no,EVE will not be multi sharded"
I said "Excellent"
All of EVE in one universe is it's biggest attraction
all the whiners are it's biggest failing
|
Gonada
Gallente
Cross Roads
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 00:48:00 -
[30]
all of eve's whiners are its biggest failing...
boy, you hit that nail on the head.
and still, for the record, i, and ohh, about 3/4 of the player base ge get lag rarely, except when going to say, ohh, i dunno... JITA>?
-I don't necessarily agree with everything I say.-
-nerf Missles-
|
Del369
Caldari
Office linebackers
Center for Disease Creation
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 01:39:00 -
[31]
Originally by: SN3263827
Don't be fooled into thinking Traffic Control is somehow the affliction of solely highly populated systems.
I lost a megathron to a gank squad earlier this evening because I was #4 in the queue to jump into an empty 0.0 system for 4 minutes.
Its quite frankly ridiculous, and makes playing the game impossible.
yea seeing these in 0.0 a lot, to jump from empty systems into empty systems, petition that to hell and back, you shouldnt be attackable if your stuck in a jump queue anyway, it's ccp's problem not yours.
these are my views, though i'd hope that anyone living in 0.0 would agree, including my corp and alliance
Originally by: Wrangler
That is an outright lie! We don't want to discriminate anyone! We want *both* anti-social *and* social players to grief each other!
|
Kldraina
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 02:41:00 -
[32]
It would be interesting if they stuck a POS style shield around Stargates, so people in jump range could neither attack, nor be attacked. Might get abused though.
Personally, I think having only one shard is a good thing. While you might never see most of the people in the game, have no doubt that their presence affects you. |
Vrizuh
Eve Defence Force
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 02:42:00 -
[33]
I think sharding eve would be like changing WoW so that when you die you drop all your armor and lose a bit of xp.
It simply is not how the game was envisioned or designed. Look at the largest alliances in EvE today. There aren't a lot of them. Imagine splitting the playerbase down the middle, and also allowing a safehole for the miserable players to go jump into everytime things get rough.
Eve politics would be impoverished, malnourished. Hell, the server I play on in WoW has/had basically 1 major guild per side for the first 2 years.
I needed more isk, so I took a risk. I mined some ore then fled once more. I'll return to the core to escape the war! |
Desiderious
Gallente
Catalyst Reaction
Xelas Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 02:49:00 -
[34]
Ok, eve is going to keep growing. Great. But eventually they will run out of space. Its a sad fact. I doubt that technology will allow CCP to have as many gamers on one server as they want forever...SO whats gonna happen? I dont know.
Here is my suggestion however. Perhaps the Eve Gate finally re-opens? Not only are there lore reasons for it but its a liable way to divide Eve into another 'server'. However you can also add inter-'server' chat and market skills which could reach through the gate to make the two feel more connected. Its just an idea, im sure the EVe team already has a use for the thing
-----------------------------
Oink ^OO^ |
Glengrant
Minmatar
TOHA Heavy Industries
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 02:59:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Vetur
Originally by: Merchantigus
Well, firstly, I don't herald the doom of EVE intentionally, because I love EVE. I even like the one-server model - my initial question stemmed from the fact that (maybe due to my inadequate understanding of the way the game's hardware works) I see a lot of apparently population-related problems,
And you assume it is a universal. But it is not. I play a lot - I have very rarely any noticable lag. Certainly not enough to bother me.
And never even close to the level where I would welcome a shard (China doesn't count - and even that bothers me a bit).
The one world aspect of Eve with it's effect on rep and history has great appeal to me and many others. I'd probably cancel over this.
Also - I'm sure CCP is working on load balancing optimizations to get more of the existing hardware into better use.
Quote:
and an apparently obvious solution that CCP don't seem to want to take.
Good! Very good. Because they are not alone. Many don't want them to take that obvious but lame non-solution. A solution that breaks the game is not a solution, regardless how obvious.
It would solve one problem and create another. And you would still get lag. The shards wouldn't get each a copy of Tranquility cluster - they would have much less players - but also less hardware. You'ld still get lag in some systems/constellations.
Also it's a myth that we now have lag as in we didn't have much in the past. Eve always had occasional lag. It's just hard to predict where and what people will do and where and therefore to have the hardware where it's needed.
People have complained about lag 3 years ago. And the level of complaining hasn't changed much - thus I conclude overall lag is actually similar - only now we have several times the population and much bigger fleet battles. The stress that is now caused by battles between a few hudred ships - took only a couple dozen ships years back. Worts lag I ever had was in a battle with less about 20 ships 2 years ago or so (CFS vs Mo0).
Quote:
So how exactly does moving out of Jita solve the problem for me? For that matter, how does it solve it for people whose corp offices or favoured agents are in that system?
You don't have to have an office there. It doesn't have to be your fav agent. Some choices come with a price.
Also I assure you that I fly around a lot and I was in about 4 short queues (longest was 7 - once - cost me 15 seconds or so) - I rarely experience lag. I'm not saying it doesn't exist and that it is not much worse for others - I'm sure a battle with hundreds of ships in a random 0.0 system is quite a strain on the surprised local node. But perhaps part of the problem is not TQ but your client or connection? (not queues obviously :-) - but then as I said - I rarely see queues).
|
Xavier Raines
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 03:12:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Merchantigus
Edited by: Merchantigus on 11/12/2006 22:46:37
Originally by: Vetur
stuff tangible - from continuing to insist on remaining on a single server?
Dooms day nub post #4326. keep it up and someday there will be more of these than s*****rdly pod kills
The problem right now is jita and the people to daft to just move that would rather sit here and start "eve is doomed!11" or "i logged in jita and there is a que?!1!1" post instead of moving a few systems over.
before i totally left that area i was a grand total of 5 jumps from jita and there were no login ques or lag. the only time i get a gate que was the gateway system between regions. since then i've not had anything. no lag. no ques.
MOVE THE **** OUT OF JITA if you don't like the problems you are causing.
I agree. Once I saw the word "Jita" in his original post, I realized this was just another thinnly veiled lag/que/overpopulated Jita whine post and just skipped most of it.
|
Xavier Raines
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 03:17:00 -
[37]
Edited by: Xavier Raines on 12/12/2006 03:20:38
Originally by: Desiderious
Ok, eve is going to keep growing. Great. But eventually they will run out of space. Its a sad fact. I doubt that technology will allow CCP to have as many gamers on one server as they want forever...SO whats gonna happen? I dont know.
Here is my suggestion however. Perhaps the Eve Gate finally re-opens? Not only are there lore reasons for it but its a liable way to divide Eve into another 'server'. However you can also add inter-'server' chat and market skills which could reach through the gate to make the two feel more connected. Its just an idea, im sure the EVe team already has a use for the thing
If CCP would have followed through with the mission runner/probing changes they put in with Revs instead of caving in to the crying babies on Wednesday, this game might not have some of these population issues as most of the Carebear lifers would have gone back to WoW with a Kleenex in their hand on the way out the door.
|
JForce
N.W.A
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 03:55:00 -
[38]
If you created a whole new cluster.
And filled it with new, empty space.
And the only link with the current cluster was 3 different systems, which were in hi-sec, and couldn't be camped, then you could move between them with long-load times while you switched clusters.
The point is that there are ways of doing it.
However my main thought, as someone who loves the 1 universe aspect, is this:
I wouldn't want it until EVERYTHING ELSE TO FIX THE PROBLEMS HAD BEEN DONE.
But the 1 thing I've never seen is where the devs think we can get to.
Do they even think it's possible to have a lag-free game? With no jump queues, no login queues?
Or are they just trying to get it to be as good as it can be, even if that isn't acceptable for combat for instance?
Minmatar: Train two "primary" systems, taking twice the time, for 1/2 the benefit. It's a thing of beauty.
|
CRUSH BOSS
Caldari
BOSS PRODUCTIONS
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 04:11:00 -
[39]
well i think its fair to say once the population of eve grows so will the server farms, if there is one thing CCP know how to do and thats run a game, This game roX and thats it.
We fight for the ONE - We die for the ONE |
Miss Overlord
Gallente
Ferrum Pugnus
New Eve Order
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 04:14:00 -
[40]
points whiners to game development forum also points em to log into SISI and also to features and ideas forum
These posts represent my personal views and not those of my corp or alliance. These do not reflect offical alliance or corp views
This is a disclaimer |
sonofollo
Caldari
5th Front enterprises
New Eve Order
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 04:16:00 -
[41]
Originally by: CRUSH BOSS
well i think its fair to say once the population of eve grows so will the server farms, if there is one thing CCP know how to do and thats run a game, This game roX and thats it.
that said its scaleable which means more players more money more solar systems potentiall jove space is next and maybe more low sec
Im a happy little camper now - CCP 4tw. |
hangovur
Reikoku
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 05:58:00 -
[42]
the day eve shards is the day i cancel my accounts.
|
Megadon
Caldari
Deathshead Inc.
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 06:04:00 -
[43]
Another universe, shard whatever is inevitable. If Eve keeps growing it will simply surpass the ability of the hardware available today to support that many players in one universe.
If it is handled properly, it will have zero impact on eve, other than the fact that more people will be able to play it lag free which is progress, not a step backwards.
At any rate, it's going to happen sooner or later at this rate of growth.
|
Paladineguru
Gallente
DAB
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 07:11:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Insidi Us
The thing I love about a single server is player accountability. Last thing we need is some server A idiot coming to server B and leaving his or her reputation at the door.
for ten bux you can get that on tq now, also with an alt or purchased character , this arguement is invalid
|
Aphotic Raven
Gallente
WMD Special Forces
Dark Forces Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 07:57:00 -
[45]
Originally by: w0rmy
Originally by: Bigoleed
A second server would probably break EVE as we know it. I'm not sure if this is the sole reason they aren't doing it
It wouldnt break EVE
Eve china anyone?
We dont need china flooding our server...
The load would kill TQ... that and... well...
Quote:
Melicien Tetro: I tried to fight a shark with a pistol underwater once, and I'll be ****ed if he didn't laugh at me and eat me. Sharks need a ******* nerf. True story
|
Bambi
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 08:01:00 -
[46]
NEVER!!!
EVE would not be EVE with out a single universe....
That would be one thing that would make me hand in my pilots license after almost 4 years
[sig banned as it was just too damn good]
Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit; Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad.
EVE-Log
|
Rey Xavier
Gallente
Bluestar Enterprises
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 08:16:00 -
[47]
Edited by: Rey Xavier on 12/12/2006 08:23:05
Hm, I wonder what's technically possible.
If the infrastructure of EVE can't support more then 50000 players in the current form maybe there could be a kind of "superstructure", a kind of linked shards, where each shard is connected to the other, but like traveling from one Galaxy(arm) to the other it would not be without restrictions (kind of jump queue or something to balance shard load and /or working like JC). Maybe there is also the option to have support systems to improve performance in shards under heavy load because of massive engagements. Even though no perfect solution it could create the 50000 player chunks technically possible while still having a connected EVE-world.
Such a structure could be implemented rp/gameplay wise with a new opening wormhole leading to unexplored space or something...
I am no network/server specialist so forgive me throwing around generalisations without the neccessary technical background, just thought it might be an interesting idea...
===============================
Ihr pers÷nliches Kreditinstitut |
Rey Xavier
Gallente
Bluestar Enterprises
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 08:19:00 -
[48]
Oh yeah, a cool story could be that the wormhole reopens and the EVE citizens would be eager to discover their homeworld, but much has changed and dangers await...
===============================
Ihr pers÷nliches Kreditinstitut |
Silver Night
Caldari
Intergalactic Combined Technologies
THE INTERSTELLAR FOUNDRY
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 08:32:00 -
[49]
Edited by: Silver Night on 12/12/2006 08:41:13
It's looking like maybe most people don't understand how Eve works, or its server. The game is already run on a buncha different servers, all linked together. All sharding would mean is that they would no longer be linked. Irrelevant. You would still ahve the same number of people ont eh same number of machines, they would jsut be seperated. Minus the people, including myself, who quit because of the change.
Why is sharding bad you ask?
Because right now, your achievements impact everyone in the game. You can corner the market on soem item or mineral for a whoel region, and knwo what you did has an effect on everyone in the game, as it ripples through a huge complex global market from region to region. Sharding makes what you do irrelevant for at least ahld the player base. It destroys the community that amkes this game better than any other.
Incidentally, if the game were sharded, you would ahve the same numebr of systems in each shard, but running on half the hardware. What fun.
I'm sure someone more technically versed (DS?) will come along and explain those bits better, but its a bad idea from a purely non-technical, ruin things standpoint.
Things don't matter even a tiny fraction as much on a sharded game.
Look at the GHSC heist, or the GNW (For those around back then), and tell me if anyone would really care if they had just happened on 'some server'.
Better: Name one WOW player who is in any way famous through the entire player base of the game. Where even 50% of people recognize his/her name. Leeroy, being famous more for being a dumbass than actual gameplay, doesn't count.
Now, when I say Istvaan, Dark Shikari, CYVOK, or Sir Molle, who knows who I'm talking about?
Edit: What would help more than sharding is some sorta dynamic load balancing doohicky. It'd take someone who knows more to tell how that would work, but basically more of the problem is that its jsut a part of the hardware that is put under the huge load of a particular fleet battle or Jita. While there are something in teh hundreds of servers that the game runs on, only one? Or is it a few of them now? Can be tasked to a single high load system, while others run at only a tiny part of thier capacity.
--------------
Director.
GLS Mr. State
Caldari Patriot.
Murderer of (his own) Frigates.
|
Superbus Maximus
Gallente
Sniggerdly
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 08:34:00 -
[50]
I got a simple fix allow snigg to attack in jita and we'll destroy the market in a day, thus allowing them to free up all those nodes they got just for that system :)
Ha you think thats big wait till you see the next |
Rey Xavier
Gallente
Bluestar Enterprises
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 08:44:00 -
[51]
Ah, maybe I did not describe my suggestion not detailed enough. It would also be interesting to know what the critical problems are - if there are any. If they could simply add more clusters (if subscriber numbers raise higher) there's probably no problem. But I wonder what happens if player number would be 4x the number of today and if two huge alliances would wage war or if an event takes place - wouldn't they completely lag out the cluster the system is in "physically"?
If player numbers over 50000 are technically not possible without a kind of "crowd"-control maybe a system of linked shards could implement that crowd control until a higher playerbase on one shard is technologically doable.
===============================
Ihr pers÷nliches Kreditinstitut |
Silver Night
Caldari
Intergalactic Combined Technologies
THE INTERSTELLAR FOUNDRY
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 08:48:00 -
[52]
The system you describe is basically how it is now. When you jump between systems, you are generally switching nodes, which as i understand it is a group of machines that run one or more systems. The trouble is that only one node can run one system. So, like, Jite is only running on one Node, and the site of whatever fleet battle, also jsut one node. This is why I mention the ability to have more nodes supporting as being helpful. I can only assume that it is difficult technically soemhow, or they would ahve made it possible by now.
--------------
Director.
GLS Mr. State
Caldari Patriot.
Murderer of (his own) Frigates.
|
Sokratesz
Guardians of Hell's Gate
Tactical Narcotics Team
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 08:53:00 -
[53]
Second eve server? i can imagine alot of long timers quitting when they would introduce it
instead, get out of empire. living in 0.0 = no queues no lag no nothing
And to the OP, yes, i believe it would be a good idea to invest in the infrastructure before allowing loads more players on the server.
Basilisk Fitting Link |
Rey Xavier
Gallente
Bluestar Enterprises
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 09:10:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Silver Night
The system you describe is basically how it is now. When you jump between systems, you are generally switching nodes, which as i understand it is a group of machines that run one or more systems. The trouble is that only one node can run one system. So, like, Jite is only running on one Node, and the site of whatever fleet battle, also jsut one node. This is why I mention the ability to have more nodes supporting as being helpful. I can only assume that it is difficult technically soemhow, or they would ahve made it possible by now.
Hm, so I guess JITA is already running on a single physical (and the most performant/new) server?
As long as physical server and game system are linked there is probably no way to have a lagfree loadbalancing. But question is if seperation (maybe in an abstract way like BOINC works, having support through stand-by systems) is possible. If yes I guess the problem is rather that the game is based on the old architecture and adaption would probably need an incredible amount of work.
Would be interesting to hear some details from the developers, about the cause of currently problems and their "vision" about what might be possible in teh future.
===============================
Ihr pers÷nliches Kreditinstitut |
Berious
The Graduates
Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 09:21:00 -
[55]
Sharding EVE would ruin one of it's unique features - a shared history with everyone playing the game. CCP should spread people out (hey how about a sliding tax rate like office/sci&industry services, move the best agents into unpopulated regions, etc) more aggressively before they even consider sharding.
|
Erle Koenig
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 09:29:00 -
[56]
eve is somewhat of a closed system. out of all the players which join eve, roughly 70% will remain in empire for most their existance here. While the other 30% will spend most their existance in 0.0.
this is a simple ODE(ordinary differential equation) involving a rate at which a 'contaminant' is introduced to a 'pool' which has a 'drain'. the problem is that empire space is not expanding in volume. The ratios will never change. The only hope for a stablized system(in the near future) is for the larger alliances to create their own empires to allow those ratios to effectively switch. Ideally, it should be that 70% of eve should be taking part in 0.0 PC empire life while the other 30% live out their lives in NPC faction empire. This cannot happen without converting many of the useless 0.0 systems into better ones. Effectively increasing the resources of said alliance's space. Until this happens, the overall activity of the inhabitants of EvE will oscillate chaotically(like a strange attractor) around an equilibrium point. EvE will stop growing.
luckily, things like constellation sovereignty are coming. this will allow for an increased ratio of 0.0 inhabitants. Though without the addition of resources, don't expect much of a change. alliances are closed systems themselves. They too will oscillate, but it depends moreso on how much they can extract from their land.
planetary interaction may also be the saving grace of node overloading. This would increase alliance income, and in effect resources. It will also create another 'pool' for which the 'contaminant' can fill.
EvE is far from dieing out. We have a good developer looking over us. They are taking the necesary steps to allow a one-shard mmo to live on. Though in terms of decades, expect to see them opening up more "new regions". EvE will always be a closed system in the end.
|
Rafein
Eye of God
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 09:37:00 -
[57]
Only way I would support sharding is if it's a one time thing. Create a ne shard, and when players create a new account, they can choose to go on tranq or the new shard. This is a one time choice on account creation, once done, that account is only valid on that shard.
And old characters would be unable to leave Tranq, only total noobs with fresh accounts on the new shard
|
Roy Batty68
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 09:59:00 -
[58]
I think it's a little unfair to CCP for players to demand that the game never be sharded.
Hypothetical - What if they determine that due to technical limitations, 46327 concurrent logins is the hard cap? Let's say that translates to approx 250k subscribers.
Who are you to say that CCP may not have any more EVE customers than this?
Practically speaking though, I get the impression that creating another EVE shard would require quite alot of new equipment. At the end of the day it's probably cheaper to keep Lego'ing in more IBM blades to support user growth rather than establishing a whole new sandbox.
Originally by: Big Al
Well, if there was a law against stupidity, the server would certainly lag less.
|
Malcanis
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 10:01:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Dred'Pirate Jesus
OhOhOh! I have an even better idea! Lets make another server just for the proffesional forum whiners.. theres about 20 of them and with alts about 60.. So take a single blade and build a forum and eve shard and let them move to it so we can finally browse the forums in peace..
(This is My view and IAC be dammed about it.. )
BEST.IDEA.YET!
|
D'Mur Pilru
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 10:05:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Danton Marcellus
The one server is what's really keeping me interested, the other games have to catch up, not EVE step down.
Yeah, I'm sure WoW will run 6 million accounts on a single shard...good idea, brilliant, Blizzard really should put their backs into that one.
|
Malcanis
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 10:23:00 -
[61]
Originally by: Rey Xavier
Edited by: Rey Xavier on 12/12/2006 08:23:05
Hm, I wonder what's technically possible.
If the infrastructure of EVE can't support more then 50000 players in the current form maybe there could be a kind of "superstructure", a kind of linked shards, where each shard is connected to the other, but like traveling from one Galaxy(arm) to the other it would not be without restrictions (kind of jump queue or something to balance shard load and /or working like JC). Maybe there is also the option to have support systems to improve performance in shards under heavy load because of massive engagements. Even though no perfect solution it could create the 50000 player chunks technically possible while still having a connected EVE-world.
Such a structure could be implemented rp/gameplay wise with a new opening wormhole leading to unexplored space or something...
I am no network/server specialist so forgive me throwing around generalisations without the neccessary technical background, just thought it might be an interesting idea...
I'd be fine with this as long as we could hop from shard to shard relatively freely. Once per 24 hour game cycle would be fine - the same rate as jump clones: Frequently enough so that it's not a huge problem but not so frequently that it's something that you can do casually. I'd also support there being a very limited number of entry points - the wormhole idea was a good one.
It would be cute to have initially just one hi-sec system (the entry point), surrounded by a 1-2 deep shell of low-sec, with the rest of the new cluster as pure 0.0. Every month or so convert 2-4 of the highest-traffic low-sec to hi-sec, and 4-6 of the highest traffic 0.0 to low sec.
|
Malcanis
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 10:27:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Sokratesz
instead, get out of empire. living in 0.0 = no queues no lag no nothing
I can tell you for a fact that this is not true. Although it is certainly better than Jita...
|
babyblue
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 10:32:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Insidi Us
The thing I love about a single server is player accountability. Last thing we need is some server A idiot coming to server B and leaving his or her reputation at the door.
To be honest, I would love that .
|
Radioactive Babe
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 11:00:00 -
[64]
the large majority of players (yes, the blob in high sec) would welcome it as their rep means nothing to them and couldnt give a **** about others either (except tossers like lofty)
someone mentioned the GHSC and Cyvok etc as showing why a single shard is great. newsflash: mostly just whorums and epeen measurers know who they are (or give a danm) ..
A good suggestion is having multiple galaxys (the wormhole comes alive again), but you can only jump between them once every 24 hours (at DT?).. good idea, just put controls on it - no wardecced corps (possibly no newbie corps), no transferring materials from one to the other, no ships/pos's transferred ... and maybe the ore could be very poor, so everyone is in T1 cruisers and frigs, and no-one can own the place with 100 T2 fitted BS's .... and 100X the routes from high sec to 0.0 .... and one for the pirates, no local
alas, poor risk vs reward, I knew you well
|
Crumplecorn
Gallente
Aerial Boundaries Inc.
Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 11:03:00 -
[65]
Originally by: Vetur
So is there something to be gained - something tangible - from continuing to insist on remaining on a single server?
Yes. And if you don't get it, you don't get Eve.
----------
IBTL \o/
EVE is upside down!
WTZ+Slower Warp=Win |
keepiru
Supernova Security Systems
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 11:13:00 -
[66]
Edited by: keepiru on 12/12/2006 11:12:52
All you people who keep suggesting shards: there's a special place for you in hell, and they have extra-pointy white-hot rusted iron sticks just for you.
If single server is not what you want, find another game, and don't let the door hit you on the way out.
----------------
Where are the scan probe BPOs? |
Miss Overlord
Gallente
Ferrum Pugnus
New Eve Order
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 11:42:00 -
[67]
Originally by: keepiru
Edited by: keepiru on 12/12/2006 11:12:52
All you people who keep suggesting shards: there's a special place for you in hell, and they have extra-pointy white-hot rusted iron sticks just for you.
If single server is not what you want, find another game, and don't let the door hit you on the way out.
[yellow] im with ya there if youre not doing anything going to work etc log out - perhaps an afk timer of 1 hour might work would also remove cloaked alts from low sec this would reduce lag - removing drones in high sec is profitable and easier now wit hscan probes ( seperate from finding mission runners) secure cans if they havent been opened in 6 months return them to the owners hanger or make them unsecured and leave them and their contents in palce until someone with a scan probe finds em ( bring back the ability to scan for cargo cans also) was taken out off SISI for some lame reason - beyond that ongoing patching work more nodes faster technology upgrade the bandwidth requried from 56k min to 128k minimum connection speed that woudl help {/yellow]
These posts represent my personal views and not those of my corp or alliance. These do not reflect offical alliance or corp views
This is a disclaimer |
BurnHard
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 12:18:00 -
[68]
I'm not sure I understand the logic of Shard = Bad. If you want to think about it, we already have 2 shards, with the one in China. The two are completely separate and don't interact with each other, so, err, please explain why this is bad again?
It all depends on Investment/Capital/Player Numbers. They cannot continue to increase ad-nauseum. At some point CCP either have to invest in a new shard or invest in new code - one or the other, if they want to grow over a certain limit.
There comes a point where your performance return per-circuit board added is no longer economic.
|
Patch86
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 12:24:00 -
[69]
Sharding EVE would be the worst thing CCP could possibly do. I have full faith that they never will.
-----------------------------------------------
|
Rey Xavier
Gallente
Bluestar Enterprises
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 12:27:00 -
[70]
Edited by: Rey Xavier on 12/12/2006 12:27:49
About the shard in China:
I think you can't compare that 100% since this is probably rather a marketing and political issue.
===============================
Ihr pers÷nliches Kreditinstitut |
Lord WarATron
Amarr
Vanguard Frontiers
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 12:28:00 -
[71]
Originally by: BurnHard
I'm not sure I understand the logic of Shard = Bad. If you want to think about it, we already have 2 shards, with the one in China. The two are completely separate and don't interact with each other, so, err, please explain why this is bad again?
It all depends on Investment/Capital/Player Numbers. They cannot continue to increase ad-nauseum. At some point CCP either have to invest in a new shard or invest in new code - one or the other, if they want to grow over a certain limit.
There comes a point where your performance return per-circuit board added is no longer economic.
The game desperatly needs more nodes. In the region of 1 node per 50-100 users, insted of 1 node per 250 users.
---
Slot 10 Akemons Modified 'Noble'Zet 5000 implant +8% Armour
FREE |
Rodj Blake
Amarr
PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 12:29:00 -
[72]
Moore's Law says that computing power on average doubles every eighteen months, so advances in technology are almost keeping up with Eve's PCU stats.
As such, I imagine that it will be a very long time indeed before the Eve cluster starts to overheat.
Dulce et decorum est, pro imperator mori
It's great being Amarr, ain't it? |
BurnHard
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 12:30:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Patch86
Sharding EVE would be the worst thing CCP could possibly do. I have full faith that they never will.
They already have. We have a shard for China. When the servers reach their limit, both from a software and hardware perspective, assuming the ROI would be prohibitive to modify either, the only way to continue growth will be to "shard", provided character transfer from one shard to the other was not possible.
|
BurnHard
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 12:31:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Rodj Blake
Moore's Law says that computing power on average doubles every eighteen months, so advances in technology are almost keeping up with Eve's PCU stats.
As such, I imagine that it will be a very long time indeed before the Eve cluster starts to overheat.
Moores law is over sunshine. These days the trick is in the software being able to take advantage of multi-cores/distributed processing scenarios. I doubt the core of Eve is able to. So we are either talking new shard or new software. It all depends on which is most economic.
|
BlueFieldsInMay
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 12:32:00 -
[75]
I remember when we passed 20k, not to long before the major hardware upgrade. You'd get 350ish people in Oursalert or some place and get stuck after the jump, no warning nothing... two hours while you waited for a GM to move you. They could only go so fast because thier commands had to run on the overloaded node also.
So 10k users later the game has something like 50k more players, way less lag and I haven't been stuck in Jita in a very long time.
|
Rodj Blake
Amarr
PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 12:37:00 -
[76]
Edited by: Rodj Blake on 12/12/2006 12:54:47
Edited by: Rodj Blake on 12/12/2006 12:37:39
Originally by: BurnHard
Originally by: Rodj Blake
Moore's Law says that computing power on average doubles every eighteen months, so advances in technology are almost keeping up with Eve's PCU stats.
As such, I imagine that it will be a very long time indeed before the Eve cluster starts to overheat.
Moores law is over sunshine. These days the trick is in the software being able to take advantage of multi-cores/distributed processing scenarios. I doubt the core of Eve is able to. So we are either talking new shard or new software. It all depends on which is most economic.
Notice that I used the weak version of Moore's Law - computing power rather than raw clock speed or number of switches.
Anyway, lag is no worse now than it was after the release of Castor three years ago.
Dulce et decorum est, pro imperator mori
It's great being Amarr, ain't it? |
Matrix Aran
Legio Immortalis
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 12:38:00 -
[77]
Edited by: Matrix Aran on 12/12/2006 12:41:01
Originally by: Vetur
I've been saying it in-game, and yes, I'm sure people are sick of hearing me whining on. It's heretical flame-bait, too, so I know I deserve what I'm bound to get here. But...
We've all been impressed with EVE's ever-increasing peak concurrent user figure. The MMO world has been rocked at the stunning achievement, I'm sure. Everquest and World of Warcraft can only look on in awe.
But seriously, CCP, isn't it time you rested on your laurels now? You've made your point: you've managed to get more people online on a single server than any other game ever. By a long, long way, too. Your record's safe for a while, no doubt - and even when and if it's broken, you still got there first. But - and maybe this is just my impression as someone who doesn't understand the technicalities behind the whole thing - I get the distinct impression Tranquility's starting to creak under the strain. Traffic control queues, from what I can gather, are a symptom of this. And because of the node setup the queues don't even make logical sense: more than once I've been held for five or ten minutes to access systems that proved to have a tiny handful of pilots in them. There's chaos in Jita - every other line in the Help channel seems to be making that point - and numerous other systems are becoming nightmares to navigate. But of course we all know about these issues.
I realise I'm uneducated on this; I'm not even what you'd call a 'hardcore' player - so I'm quite prepared to accept that I just don't know what I'm talking about. But really, is there a reason why the game can't and shouldn't be sharded at this point? I've been playing casually for a good few years now, and the game and its economy worked perfectly well a year ago when we had half the PCU level. So is there something to be gained - something tangible - from continuing to insist on remaining on a single server?
You sir have just steped on the bigest forum landmine ever in Eve. Never ever speak of sharding this lovely game, or we shalt chop your ********* off. Lets take this for example: In eve BoB destroys the first titan in its history. If there were multiple shards this event would mean diddly squat because it just means some alliance on "that other shard" kill some big ship. It loses its impact on the whole comunity and the effect gets worse the more shards you add.
Technicaly there is not a forseeable limit to a single shard. The game today with 33K peak users is running about as well back when 5K users was a record. The reason is simple: Eve effectively is already sharded. Seeing as different solar systems rest on different server nodes, efectivly the server is segmented, but under normal conditions you never notice this. As more and more players join the game, the eve devs add more hardware to create more individual nodes.
----
Originally by: Oveur on rigs
Sure, np, it's only like ... the 6th time I say this here
|
|
wystler
Forum Moderator
Interstellar Services Department
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 12:54:00 -
[78]
To those people commenting about traffic control and the problems caused by it, Oveur stated on EVE-TV on Sunday that its causing more problems than it solves and they are talking about taking it out. Whether that means definitely it IS coming out or not I guess we wait and see 
(Donations of beer to Oveur usually assist this kind of thing along smoothly )
|
|
Nobler
Caldari
Messerschmitt Shipyards
The SUdden Death Squad
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 13:01:00 -
[79]
I like the post about logging off afk players, I think if you are afk for six hours- sitting in a station, you will be logged off after so many hours of inactivity, or maybe make that an option in the client to set a log off timer.
I mean come on how many of us get drunk, go ganking, get pod killed, and pass out at the station We sleep for hours on end while we tie up a spot on the cluster..it's fair. Not just get drunk some of just don't sleep so we fall asleep in front of the computer.
For you old farts that use to play Trade Wars and games a like remember it had a log off inactivity timer.
Also adopting from Trade Wars - Sector voids. Players should be able to exclude waypoints in their autopilot path, and we can sorta do this now, we just can't specify exact sectors.
Jump Queues - I remember hearing they were going away after last big upgrade because that would *fix* all the problems. I think it would be fair to cloak someone that is waiting to jump. I have been in 0.0 jumping into a 0.0 sector with 0 people in it, and got put in a jump queue. Possible that low populated 0.0 space is being put on nodes with high empire traffic..anyway it's a load of Minmater Dog Poo that we can get ganked waiting at a gate because the cluster has issues. Balance it please.
Closing- CCP congrats for making one of my favorite games. Three paid accounts, one ****ed off wife, one house that never will get painted , multiple computers, high speed internet connection, and constant forum browsing at work. Hi my name is Nobler and I'm an EvE addict. Great game, just has it's growing pains.
|
Mesacc
Gallente
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 13:07:00 -
[80]
Originally by: George Soros
A new shard can be a whole new section of Eve. New areas that exists parallel to the Eve we know.
That made me think, What if the worm hole re-opened (second server we could swap between)and we could go back to the galaxy we came from? maybee find earth? (or by that time, whats left of it) Just a thought
|
babyblue
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 13:29:00 -
[81]
Originally by: Mesacc
Originally by: George Soros
A new shard can be a whole new section of Eve. New areas that exists parallel to the Eve we know.
That made me think, What if the worm hole re-opened (second server we could swap between)and we could go back to the galaxy we came from? maybee find earth? (or by that time, whats left of it) Just a thought
imho that is not the same as another shard, it is simply a mechanism for adding to the existing shard, since what defines your shard is both character and object persistence from one server to another.
|
Vetur
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 13:31:00 -
[82]
Originally by: Glengrant
Originally by: Vetur
I see a lot of apparently population-related problems,
And you assume it is a universal. But it is not. I play a lot - I have very rarely any noticable lag. Certainly not enough to bother me.
No, I don't assume it's universal. I assume it's a problem being experienced by a lot of players. As a matter of fact lag rarely causes me problems, either, although I notice it from time to time. I was more moved to ask the question by the jump queues, and by CCP's own comments about the reduction in server performance lately. Quote:
And never even close to the level where I would welcome a shard (China doesn't count - and even that bothers me a bit).
Quote:
A solution that breaks the game is not a solution, regardless how obvious.
So surely there is no level at which you'd welcome a shard. Or is it more the case that sharding would not break the game, as such, but that it would change it in a way that you personally wouldn't like? Quote:
Also I assure you that I fly around a lot and I was in about 4 short queues (longest was 7 - once - cost me 15 seconds or so)
And that's fine - as long as you realise that people's experience with queues is inevitably going to be subjective. You've lost 15 seconds to a queue - good for you. Many others have lost a lot longer than that - not to mention the loss of ships and ISK. And finding myself at #56 in a queue last night to get into a system reporting 13 pilots on the map seemed unreasonable. You may well have been lucky. Perhaps today you'll not be. Who knows? Quote:
But perhaps part of the problem is not TQ but your client or connection? (not queues obviously :-)
No - as you say, not queues. |
Vetur
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 13:33:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Crumplecorn
Yes. And if you don't get it, you don't get Eve.
Thanks for that bit of wisdom. |
Crumplecorn
Gallente
Aerial Boundaries Inc.
Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 13:34:00 -
[84]
Originally by: BurnHard
Originally by: Patch86
Sharding EVE would be the worst thing CCP could possibly do. I have full faith that they never will.
They already have. We have a shard for China.
No, that's a seperate game. You sign up for WoW, you get put on one of many servers. You sign up for Eve, there is only one server you are put on. They needed a seperate one for China for other reasons.
----------
IBTL \o/
EVE is upside down!
WTZ+Slower Warp=Win |
Grez
Minmatar
The Raven Warriors
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 13:36:00 -
[85]
Edited by: Grez on 12/12/2006 13:38:02
Firstly, EVE is on many servers. It's not just one blade like many other game servers are. TQ is THE most powerful virtual gaming server in the world. It's so powerful, it's in the top 500 super clusters in the world, and CCP had to check-in with the US military to get the RAMSAN's they wanted. Point I'm trying to make is that, EVE's already sharded, beyond belief, but CCP's software handles it in such a way that it's handled as one whole.
The next step for TQ is optimisations on the software side of things. We already have nodes up the wazoo, and they are always trying to find ways to boost TQ, and give her new life. More nodes, or hardware will not fix the problem, neither will sharding it to much extent. The reason we have a China 'shard', is that the Chinese government do not allot Chinese gamers to play on games more than a few hours a day, and they enforce checks for this, and they have to have seperate gaming servers to allow this, hence there's a seperate 'shard' for China.
Just wait for them to roll out software enhancements, and stay out of trade hubs (Jita).
---
Cache Clearer
Still waiting for a Wrangler-edit! |
Mesacc
Gallente
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 13:36:00 -
[86]
Originally by: babyblue
Originally by: Mesacc
Originally by: George Soros
A new shard can be a whole new section of Eve. New areas that exists parallel to the Eve we know.
That made me think, What if the worm hole re-opened (second server we could swap between)and we could go back to the galaxy we came from? maybee find earth? (or by that time, whats left of it) Just a thought
imho that is not the same as another shard, it is simply a mechanism for adding to the existing shard, since what defines your shard is both character and object persistence from one server to another.
Your prolly right. I dont have a clue how it all works or what all those technical terms mean. I just thought it would be cool.
|
BhallSpawn
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 13:37:00 -
[87]
Dynamic Load Balencing
That's what eve needs
It doesn't need more shards, and split up up servers
It needs resource allocation on a dynamic level to make it so where the population goes the resources go with it.
I'm tired of the ques, they made no sense.. (sorry the cosmos is full right now)... but something has to be done. Telling us 50k would be no problem with the tranq update turned out to be a huge lie, and the server can barely handle 30k.
If the programmers were smart they'd put the game down for a week and redo the code right.
Cause as it is now.. throwing hardware upgrades at a borked system won't solve anything.
|
Grez
Minmatar
The Raven Warriors
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 13:40:00 -
[88]
Originally by: BhallSpawn
Dynamic Load Balencing
That's what eve needs
It doesn't need more shards, and split up up servers
It needs resource allocation on a dynamic level to make it so where the population goes the resources go with it.
I'm tired of the ques, they made no sense.. (sorry the cosmos is full right now)... but something has to be done. Telling us 50k would be no problem with the tranq update turned out to be a huge lie, and the server can barely handle 30k.
If the programmers were smart they'd put the game down for a week and redo the code right.
Cause as it is now.. throwing hardware upgrades at a borked system won't solve anything.
It already has this. If a node goes down, it shunts systems it hosts to a new node as fast as it can. It also detects the usage of systems over a period of time, and assigns the more comonly used systems to nodes with systems that are hardly ever used. And I'd love to see you re-write millions of lines of code in a week. They're throwin hardware at TQ because they needed it to host the new regions.
---
Cache Clearer
Still waiting for a Wrangler-edit! |
Mephesto Nizal
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 13:41:00 -
[89]
There needs to be a purgetory fire in between systems. When you jump with the gate, there should be somekind of visual effect happening before you enter the system during the trip. Have that effect last as long as the queue.
|
Crumplecorn
Gallente
Aerial Boundaries Inc.
Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 13:43:00 -
[90]
Edited by: Crumplecorn on 12/12/2006 13:43:45
Originally by: Mephesto Nizal
There needs to be a purgetory fire in between systems. When you jump with the gate, there should be somekind of visual effect happening before you enter the system during the trip. Have that effect last as long as the queue.
A.K.A. a loading screen. Nice.
I can just see the loading message now, 'Loading... Please wait as that hauler you were chasing gets away'
----------
IBTL \o/
EVE is upside down!
WTZ+Slower Warp=Win |
Vetur
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 13:47:00 -
[91]
Originally by: Matrix Aran
You sir have just steped on the bigest forum landmine ever in Eve.
<Snip for space>
Thank you for your considered response. This was exactly what I was looking for when I asked the question. Originally by: wystler
To those people commenting about traffic control and the problems caused by it, Oveur stated on EVE-TV on Sunday that its causing more problems than it solves and they are talking about taking it out.
Thank you. I didn't see the broadcast - just heard someone had mentioned it might be removed.
Okay, so I realise now that there's more to this question than I'd originally considered and, like most things must be when you're running a game like this, it's a juggling act. Advantages always having to be weighed against disadvantages.
Incidentally, for those who immediately leapt to the conclusion that I was "whining" - I wasn't. I was asking an honest question based on negative experiences that I'd had (albeit not that many), plus the experiences I'm aware that other people have had. Criticising a game like this doesn't mean that I hate it; offering suggestions - however stupid they may be in light of other people's greater experience - doesn't equate to what I'd consider 'whining', nor does it indicate an intention to cancel, or a condemnation of EVE, its devs or its players. If I was going to cancel, I'd not announce it. Whose business would it be but mine and CCP's?
Anyway, all that aside, I'm grateful to those of you who took the time to post your opinions. |
babyblue
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 13:47:00 -
[92]
Edited by: babyblue on 12/12/2006 13:47:44
I remember some time ago saying I thought that resource allocation should be as fine-grained as being able to allocate resources on a grid-level, rather than at a system level. It turns out that there is significant cost in the session change from one node to another and if you were to try this on a grid level, it would be quite prohibitive and may even make your cluster slower, not faster.
I'm sure this is true, but the real issue isn't the cost of state change, it's the cost of state change the way Eve does it .
|
BlueFieldsInMay
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 14:00:00 -
[93]
Originally by: Grez
Edited by: Grez on 12/12/2006 13:38:02
Firstly, EVE is on many servers. It's not just one blade like many other game servers are. TQ is THE most powerful virtual gaming server in the world. It's so powerful, it's in the top 500 super clusters in the world, and CCP had to check-in with the US military to get the RAMSAN's they wanted. Point I'm trying to make is that, EVE's already sharded, beyond belief, but CCP's software handles it in such a way that it's handled as one whole.
The last time I checked the LEAST computer (owned by a gaming company) on the top 500 was an order of magnitude larger than TQ... CCP wanted to be the first gaming company on that list but was beaten long ago and hasn't gotten on it yet.
this top 500 stuff came about from Ovuer opening his mouth while drunk, much like this removing jump queues thing ...
|
DeckardIRL
Gallente
Bravehearts
Xelas Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 14:14:00 -
[94]
Eve must always remain a single shard. I believe the China server will one day be connected to TQ... once China law changes and CCP can get a fat pipe between the servers at a cost effective price. With todays and future technologies the server should always remain a single shard- todays technologies dont have the limits- currently under test are 32 core processors... for an 8 processor system thats 256 processor cores in 1 server... so relax for the future ppl.
Strangely Oursulaert only has around 300 ppl in it these days, no queues and no lag... so clearly something has to be done with Jita and why all the Caldari scum are lagging the server by living out of 1 system.... I am in 0.0 atm and getting jump queues into empty systems!!! I am sure it wont be long before a change is implemented to cure TQ of this Caldari issue... I expect that when Jove space is opened as an empire space there will be lots of population movements that should see current empire space depopulate and spread the load somewhat.
Deck
_____________________________________________
Watchin' the Game.... Havin' a Bud....
I shoot better on Bud.....
Eve Info- All you need to know |
HighlanderUK
Gallente
Interstellar Business Machines Corp.
9th Fleet
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 15:01:00 -
[95]
One also needs to be mindful of why systems like Jita/Oursul are busy, and yes some of it is down to new(ish) players. But the rest of the problem lies with CCP for leaving services/agents in these systems, and the manufacturers/traders, for only selling T2 items in the same system, everybody has to go to these systems to get T2, rare minerals and other such goodies.
If everyone was spread out, the blades server could do their load balancing work properly and take advantage of the new toys/hardware that was put in place. Instead resources are thrown at these hub systems.
Best thing to do is get Concord to operate a system wide smartbomb that fires once per hour.......so u get in, grab what you need and get out. Failsafe is you cant jump into system while 'cleansing is in progress'(or 15km protection bubble around gates), and you get a wee timer while your in the system -- giving time till next clensing!!!
**************************************************
Maker of the finest Scottish drones and ammo...all combined
with Active Peat Camouflage (tm) -- so dark, you won't see them coming!! |
Buster Gonads
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 15:12:00 -
[96]
Originally by: HighlanderUK
Best thing to do is get Concord to operate a system wide smartbomb that fires once per hour.......so u get in, grab what you need and get out. Failsafe is you cant jump into system while 'cleansing is in progress'(or 15km protection bubble around gates), and you get a wee timer while your in the system -- giving time till next clensing!!!
LOL. Role-play it - the star in that system becomes unstable, emitting an EMP pulse or ejecting a plasma cloud at near-light-speed every hour.
|
DeckardIRL
Gallente
Bravehearts
Xelas Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 15:20:00 -
[97]
Edited by: DeckardIRL on 12/12/2006 15:21:08
Could you die if you were docked? Wouldnt like to think so... so everyone docks...
Deck
_____________________________________________
Watchin' the Game.... Havin' a Bud....
I shoot better on Bud.....
Eve Info- All you need to know |
Lancer Hawk
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 15:54:00 -
[98]
i have a good idea.
make jita 0.0...
then see how many players vacate the system
even better
make multiple gank squads attacking somebody in every astroid belt, stargate,planet, station moon, and see if concord can deal with 100 different incedents. and how many NPC you can get into 1 system :P
|
Roshan longshot
Gallente
Ordos Humanitas
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 16:01:00 -
[99]
Originally by: Insidi Us
The thing I love about a single server is player accountability. Last thing we need is some server A idiot coming to server B and leaving his or her reputation at the door.
Hummm, with multiple accounts, some people have 21 characters to play with. How can you possible say Player accountability?
With up to 21 characters/toons...You have no clue as to who the main is.
Free-form Professions, ensure no limetations on professions. Be a trader, fighter, industialist, researcher, hunter pirate or mixture of them all.
[i]As read from the original box.
|
Patch86
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 16:31:00 -
[100]
Originally by: Roshan longshot
Originally by: Insidi Us
The thing I love about a single server is player accountability. Last thing we need is some server A idiot coming to server B and leaving his or her reputation at the door.
Hummm, with multiple accounts, some people have 21 characters to play with. How can you possible say Player accountability?
With up to 21 characters/toons...You have no clue as to who the main is.
But atelast every single character is accountable. Lets say for example, I (as in Patch86, the character) scammed my corp, and stole several billion isk worth of goods and did a runner. They will always remember Patch86 as the no good scammer who ripped thm off, they'll never let that go. And if they go to the forums about iot, EVERYONE in EVE would no- it'd follow me around for the rest of my time here. Its true that me playing on an alt account would make me flame-impervious (providing I never told anyone) but Patch86 would never escape that branding.
In WoW, as an example of a sharded game- I do something aweful to my clan/guild whatever they call them. If I get bored of the image of scammer, I can just go to another server. Done.
-----------------------------------------------
|
DarkFenix
Caldari
Pilots From Honour
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 17:26:00 -
[101]
The OP seems not to have grasped one fact. Being shardless isn't some little gimmick, or a lame attempt at a record. It's a key part of what makes EVE the game it is today. A shardless server essentially makes EVE the only MMORPG that actually lives up to the massively multiplayer part. All the others are just moderately multiplayer online games.
|
Andrue
Amarr
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 17:55:00 -
[102]
Originally by: HighlanderUK
One also needs to be mindful of why systems like Jita/Oursul are busy, and yes some of it is down to new(ish) players. But the rest of the problem lies with CCP for leaving services/agents in these systems, and the manufacturers/traders, for only selling T2 items in the same system, everybody has to go to these systems to get T2, rare minerals and other such goodies.
And to other players for being ignorant of the market. I fit nothing but T2 gear to all my ships and I have no problem picking stuff up without going to Jita. Amarr/Sarum Prime usually fulfills my requirements, if not a quick trip to Tash-Murkon will.
--
(Battle hardened industrialist)
[Brackley, UK]
Linux is only free if your time is worthless |
DOGNOSH
Minmatar
Rage of Angels
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 18:05:00 -
[103]
Originally by: Grez
Edited by: Grez on 12/12/2006 13:38:02
Point I'm trying to make is that, EVE's already sharded, beyond belief, but CCP's software handles it in such a way that it's handled as one whole.
with all due respect that is not the definition of shard
EVE is one shard because it is all in one persistant universe
|
dailyhazard
Caldari
Kemono.
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 18:11:00 -
[104]
Originally by: SN3263827
Don't be fooled into thinking Traffic Control is somehow the affliction of solely highly populated systems.
I lost a megathron to a gank squad earlier this evening because I was #4 in the queue to jump into an empty 0.0 system for 4 minutes.
Its quite frankly ridiculous, and makes playing the game impossible.
Thats what you get when you run when you outnumber the other gang.
Woohoo it made me happy there was jump queue :p
But it is pretty redicolous but i generally spam jump and i jump within 10 seconds of first warning.
|
JeanPierre
Gallente
Acheron Vanguard Armada
The Shadow Ascension
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 18:15:00 -
[105]
Originally by: Jim McGregor
Originally by: Cornelius Murphy
(Just my opinion, not that of my corp )
Jesus, why do people keep writing this... who in their right mind think people speak for their entire corp when they say something?
Usually it's the CEO's of corporations or Alliances that think that. And I know, normally, they're not in their right mind to begin with.
Some alliances actually put out "don't you dare speak about anything on the forums" orders, even in regards to unrelated events (like commenting on salvaging or something generic and un-alliance/corp related).
They be egomaniacs mate.
------------------------------
Ever notice that people who spend money on beer, cigarettes, and lottery tickets are always complaining about being broke and not feeling well? |
Roshan longshot
Gallente
Ordos Humanitas
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 19:26:00 -
[106]
Originally by: Patch86
Originally by: Roshan longshot
Originally by: Insidi Us
The thing I love about a single server is player accountability. Last thing we need is some server A idiot coming to server B and leaving his or her reputation at the door.
Hummm, with multiple accounts, some people have 21 characters to play with. How can you possible say Player accountability?
With up to 21 characters/toons...You have no clue as to who the main is.
But atelast every single character is accountable. Lets say for example, I (as in Patch86, the character) scammed my corp, and stole several billion isk worth of goods and did a runner. They will always remember Patch86 as the no good scammer who ripped thm off, they'll never let that go. And if they go to the forums about iot, EVERYONE in EVE would no- it'd follow me around for the rest of my time here. Its true that me playing on an alt account would make me flame-impervious (providing I never told anyone) but Patch86 would never escape that branding.
In WoW, as an example of a sharded game- I do something aweful to my clan/guild whatever they call them. If I get bored of the image of scammer, I can just go to another server. Done.
The same here...Think Zeppo is a main charater, Or Miss LadyDragon? Both are scam alts; the main character is unknown and cannot be held responsible for their actions.
My quote still stands...as long as multiple accounts are encouraged, and each account has three character slots, there is no player accountability.
Free-form Professions, ensure no limetations on professions. Be a trader, fighter, industialist, researcher, hunter pirate or mixture of them all.
[i]As read from the original box.
|
Sokratesz
Guardians of Hell's Gate
Tactical Narcotics Team
|
Posted - 2006.12.13 12:05:00 -
[107]
CCP should have no problem running alot more then the current 30k users on a single server. Keep in mind that hardware has become significantly faster and cheaper the past years (ram prices dropping, introduction 64bit hardware and software in the future, more raw Mhz / faster etwork and internet connections).
All they need to do is add more nodes...i'm not sure how their current system works (how many hamsters per node?) but i can imagine that if they add new regions they set up a different server-rack for them so that if you jump into or out of the region you get moved to a different physical server, which would allow a (virtual) unsharded world split onto multiple physical computers.
Basilisk Fitting Link |
Glengrant
Minmatar
TOHA Heavy Industries
|
Posted - 2006.12.15 01:14:00 -
[108]
Originally by: Vetur
No, I don't assume it's universal. I assume it's a problem being experienced by a lot of players. As a matter of fact lag rarely causes me problems, either, although I notice it from time to time. I was more moved to ask the question by the jump queues, and by CCP's own comments about the reduction in server performance lately. Quote:
I generaly discount any problems in the first few weeks after major patches. You get a lot of effects that calm down after hotfixes etc... that are more temporary breakage than fundamental problems.
Originally by: Vetur
So surely there is no level at which you'd welcome a shard.
That is correct. :-)
Originally by: Vetur
Or is it more the case that sharding would not break the game, as such, but that it would change it in a way that you personally wouldn't like?
It would break the game as it was meant to be. Sure - there would still be a game and it would still have players - but a lot - including me - would probably quit over this. Not all. It might very well still be a commercialy viable game - minus one major selling point that distinguishes it from the many other MMOGs out there. Many of those BTW also have lag - sometimes bad lag - even with shards.
Sharding would not mean the hardware power of todays TQ for every shard.
Plus - as others already pointed out - we have technical sharding already. You often switch servers while traveling more than a couple systems.
Originally by: Vetur
You've lost 15 seconds to a queue - good for you. Many others have lost a lot longer than that - not to mention the loss of ships and ISK. And finding myself at #56 in a queue last night to get into a system reporting 13 pilots on the map seemed unreasonable.
I understand. And as I said - I realize that some people have real bad lag some of the time. And a few people have lag a lot of the time - but that's often because they insist on staying where they are. And leaving an overcrowded system and work with others agents is way easier than having shards - plus it is an option that is available now.
At the end of the day - it's mostly a matter of is it rare enough. If I had lag all the time (outside hub systems) I would be frustrated too. But as long as it happens only occasionaly - and as long as there's more and better hardware to buy - it's not a fundamental problem. Some lag simply comes with the MMOG package.
Originally by: Vetur
You may well have been lucky. Perhaps today you'll not be.
Today we battled an endless spawn in a complex and had so many wrecks that we did get very noticable lag. Yeah - I'd prefer not to have that - but it still ain't a big prob. Next time we bring more people to salvage in time. :-)
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |