EVE Search - If you were CCP, what would you do to reduce lag?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

If you were CCP, what would you do to reduce lag?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Anila's Delight	Posted - 2007.04.02 08:27:00 - [1] This is a bit of a whine thread for me, as I hate seeing a dozen new threads spawn after a 1000 man fleet battle killed the node and rendered the game unplayable. Now anyone who has played EvE for long enough knows that if there is enough people in one place lag will ensue, making the game largly unplayable. This was most noted when 1500 people attacked a titan producing POS and the defenders were unable to defend. This resulted in the baby titan being lost. Another instance occured recently when a system was caped at 700 people. This caused quite a few comlpaints, accusations of GM helping the defenders, the attackers being able to defend their caps and general exploiting. While there was major lag in this battle, the node held and the battle was fought. While this cap was mentioned in a dv blog some time ago, it has only recently started being enforced. Many will and have perceived this system limit as being unfair, because all an attacker/defender have to do is log 700 accounts in and generaly exploit game mechanics. Anyone who has played eve for some time has more than likely been to Jita. This system has an average of 300 people in system at any one time. If you have been their you would have noticed how bad this lag is. CCP devs/GM's/coffee girls have at one time or another said that Jita exists on CCP's most powerfull node, yet their is quite a large amount of lag with just 300 people in local. During the 1500 man fight, a CCP dev moved that system onto an identical node to Jita. This still didn't help. The game was unplayable mostly in this system. This shows us that CCP's most powerfull hardware can not cope with the large blobing tactics employed by the players. Now it is often said by CCP that they are constantly upgrading the cluster with new hardware/software, which usually results in an extended downtime (So obviously it has been happening alot lately). On top of this, CCP are also planing the need for speed inititive in an attempt to reduce lag. While us the players do not know all the details, we do know some. The interbus system is an attempt to keep everyone from having to visit a market hub buy having their purchases delivered to them for a small fee. They are also trying to force attackers into smaller gangs, with features such as attacking outpost subsystems, rather than just claiming the station in pos/station ping pong. A controvertial feature that has already been implimented is the titans doomsday device(DDD). Incase you play under a rock, the DDD is a grid wide smartbomb which does huge amounts of damage, effectivly anihilating a fleet. I belive the titan is currently overpowered with its ability to hit and run, but that is for another thread. The titans powers have forced fleet commanders to reasses tactics from their general "bring the most and biggest ships tactics". To prevent your fleet from being DDD'ed, use less ships and provide a less tempting target. Who wants to waste their once an hour fleet decimator on 12 battleships? This reduce's the number of pilots in a system, on a node and reduces lag. Most people accept lag as a way of life in EvE. Now what would you do to reduce lag? Some people say get better hardware, but where is the sense in purchasing $10mill of equipment when you can just tweak game mechanics? If it were me, I'd create more specialised ships, such as an anti-supercaptial EW ship, or, when constellation sovereignty becomes a reality, give the owners of a system the ability to control the entering stargates. So, what would you do? (please dont say kill goons or bob) Originally by: Altrex Conclusive proof ladies and gentlemen that WoW kills brain cells.
Kerdrak Amarr 3B Legio IX Freelancer Alliance	Posted - 2007.04.02 08:53:00 - [2] Make EVE a single player game ________________________________________ First atheist amarr on EVE
Arvald Caldari Saxon's Brutality	Posted - 2007.04.02 08:58:00 - [3] i would randomly delete accounts this would greatly reduce lag =-=-=-=-==-==-==-=-=-===-=-=-=-=====-=-==-=- Im screwing the pepole of eve over one freeform at a time
Benco97 Gallente Multiverse Corporation The Core Collective	Posted - 2007.04.02 09:00:00 - [4] Throw out all the players "MY GOD KEEP THIS AWAY FROM BENCO97!!!!!" - Constantine Arcanum
Phelan Lore Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2007.04.02 09:01:00 - [5] Make Jita 0.0 -
Tarminic	Posted - 2007.04.02 09:02:00 - [6] Unfortunately there isn't much that can be done except to reduce the number of players in individual battles, so the anti-blob tactics are the best way to go to be honest. Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed filesize of 24000 bytes -Hango ([email protected]) It's true, I swear.
Pan Crastus	Posted - 2007.04.02 09:05:00 - [7] I'd hire some competent developers and dish out more for proper hardware instead of considering it a lost cause and starting to work on the next game ...
Viliny principle of motion Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.04.02 09:18:00 - [8] id say, making changes to the game is like bending over and giving up, optimize the code and keep throwing more hardware at it
Alski Gallente Di-Tron Heavy Industries Freelancer Alliance	Posted - 2007.04.02 09:34:00 - [9] optimize code optimize code optimize code optimize code optimize code ... but for an empire only fix, start a 2 week countdown, after which ALL giant secure cans anchored everywhere in the galaxcy will explode went mining with a RL friend who's just started Eve about a week back, 50 frikkin cans in one belt X every belt in system, if thats not causeing database related lag i dunno what is. -
Tarminic	Posted - 2007.04.02 09:38:00 - [10] Originally by: Alski optimize code optimize code optimize code optimize code optimize code ... but for an empire only fix, start a 2 week countdown, after which ALL giant secure cans anchored everywhere in the galaxcy will explode went mining with a RL friend who's just started Eve about a week back, 50 frikkin cans in one belt X every belt in system, if thats not causeing database related lag i dunno what is. Actually...considering they're just stationary objects that rarely interact with any players they probably don't cause much lag at all, lol. Database room, on the other hand... Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed filesize of 24000 bytes -Hango ([email protected]) It's true, I swear.
Ogul Caldari ZiTek Deepspace Explorations Prime Orbital Systems	Posted - 2007.04.02 10:07:00 - [11] Originally by: Anila's Delight Now what would you do to reduce lag? Have the devs working on the game instead of playing it.
Kerc Kasha Caldari Valiant Logistics Inc. Black Flag Alliance	Posted - 2007.04.02 10:17:00 - [12] Originally by: Ogul Originally by: Anila's Delight Now what would you do to reduce lag? Have the devs working on the game instead of playing it. The devs work when they're at work, and occasionally in their free time, which is cutting into their time with their family, their brew and their time playing the game. Cut them some freaking slack with this "DEVS SHOULD BE WORKING NOT PLAYING" thing, I mean how would you feel if your boss said you shouldn't be doing anything in your life but work.
Pan Crastus	Posted - 2007.04.02 10:24:00 - [13] Edited by: Pan Crastus on 02/04/2007 10:20:10 Originally by: Kerc Kasha Cut them some freaking slack with this "DEVS SHOULD BE WORKING NOT PLAYING" thing, I mean how would you feel if your boss said you shouldn't be doing anything in your life but work. He suggested that the Devs should not play EVE instead of fixing it, not that they should not do anything in their life besides working. It might come as a shock to a fanboi like you, but there's a huge difference.
Vasiliyan Aliastra	Posted - 2007.04.02 10:27:00 - [14] Write an EVE-specific profiler. You cannot optimise what you cannot accurately measure.
Avon Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.04.02 10:28:00 - [15] I would take a close look at exactly what data each client recieves. You only need detailed information on ships you have locked, or are directly interacting with. Other data, such as ship type and location should be multicast for the current grid. The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur
Darren Facet Kinda'Shujaa Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2007.04.02 10:38:00 - [16] Edited by: Darren Facet on 02/04/2007 10:37:46 Software optimization. And this is only possible with a framework of rigid testing and automatic testing (unit tests) in place. Otherwise the risk of breaking things and introducing hidden bugs that lead to corruption of the database is very high. From all I've heard CCP relies to much on off-the-shelf products. They use very sophisticated hardware (huge amounts of battery backed up RAM as virtual DB hard disks for example), but their software is lacking. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the last I've heard is that they use Microsoft SQL Server on top of this hardware. I really hope their nodes do not run Windows, or that'd explain a lot (Not bashing Microsoft here - I run several Win 2003 Servers myself, and they are great. Except Windows does not handle more than 100% load gracefully. But I've seen Unix machines at 1000% load and they just went on, if slowly, and easily recovered). If your business depends on real-time server software, you're better of writing the core of it from scratch, on a very low level (Or at least one level lower than the top level application). Think google. If you build on top of huge frameworks and server software with vast functionality (90% of which you never need, hello SQL Server...), you're not going to build a reliable server environment. You build on top of other people's bugs that you cannot fix yourself. You build on other people's design and performance decisions you cannot change, even if they don't apply to you business case. SQL Server wasn't written for MMORPGs. You will hit a dead end when you can no longer improve your software, and all that's left is hardware or feature cuts. I think CCP has reached that point.
Sheriff Jones	Posted - 2007.04.02 10:53:00 - [17] Kick out all accounts/players who whine about lag, inbalance, titans, Chribba or anything related to bears or evil things that blow ships up No but seriously...i'd keep on rolling like it is now. They ARE working on it, just that things don't happen like snap. It's easy to judge the grassgrowth from the other side of the fence, standing on astroturf Originally by: Curzon Dax 1. I am not singing Ducktales.
sci0gon Tech 2 Ammo Holdings Limited	Posted - 2007.04.02 10:59:00 - [18] put back in the old gang system for starters. remove the voice programe added. re-do the game engine to test for issues with lag and keep on doing it till the lag issue was a lot better then what it is at the moment with so many players within 1 system
Hon Kovell Gallente Intaki Peace	Posted - 2007.04.02 11:17:00 - [19] Auto-delete all accounts in any system that hits 200 people. There may be a few complaints to begin with, but since none of the deleted people can post it won't be too bad. Sure to begin with it will be used to wipe out other alliances but people will adapt. People can still create a new account and get back into the fight so numbers of players won't necessarily drop but the change will encourage them to spread out. It might also help to delete accounts from grids with greater than 50 people.
Gabriel Karade Nulli-Secundus	Posted - 2007.04.02 11:17:00 - [20] Pretty much what they are doing at the moment, come up with new mechanics to POS warfare so you donÆt need an uberblob to achieve anything. Plus I'd change super-capital construction to being spread across multiple arrays in multiple systems - to build the final ship you have to drag the parts to a planet in freighters much like an outpost egg then wait for Downtime and out pops a ship ready for boarding. ---------- Video - 'War-Machine'
Amitabh Bachchan	Posted - 2007.04.02 11:25:00 - [21] Originally by: Gabriel Karade Pretty much what they are doing at the moment, come up with new mechanics to POS warfare so you donÆt need an uberblob to achieve anything. Plus I'd change super-capital construction to being spread across multiple arrays in multiple systems - to build the final ship you have to drag the parts to a planet in freighters much like an outpost egg then wait for Downtime and out pops a ship ready for boarding. It wont solve the problem, only transfer it! A ship can only be built at the speed of its slowest part. So insted of a Giant Blob once, you will get a Giant Blob many times. The Correct way to attack is lockdown the system in advance and then send in capitals. E.G EC-P incident. Otherwise Capital ships WILL die by the dozen.
Gaius BaItar	Posted - 2007.04.02 11:29:00 - [22] One way to reduce lag is to reduce the amount of time that is spent on the server side, calculating trajectories, distances and different parameters related to ships and systems. This could be done by reallocating some of this calculation to clientÆs computers. Considering the power of PCs today, imagine how much this would free the server. Less work for server means more available power to serve more clients, thus less lag.
Gabriel Karade Nulli-Secundus	Posted - 2007.04.02 11:30:00 - [23] Originally by: Amitabh Bachchan Originally by: Gabriel Karade Pretty much what they are doing at the moment, come up with new mechanics to POS warfare so you donÆt need an uberblob to achieve anything. Plus I'd change super-capital construction to being spread across multiple arrays in multiple systems - to build the final ship you have to drag the parts to a planet in freighters much like an outpost egg then wait for Downtime and out pops a ship ready for boarding. It wont solve the problem, only transfer it! A ship can only be built at the speed of its slowest part. So insted of a Giant Blob once, you will get a Giant Blob many times. The Correct way to attack is lockdown the system in advance and then send in capitals. E.G EC-P incident. Otherwise Capital ships WILL die by the dozen. Why blob one system when you can spread out and hit multiple ones at the same time? All of which are critical to building the ship. At the moment there is no incentive because there is just one target in one system. ---------- Video - 'War-Machine'
mr bighelmet EnTech Pax Familia	Posted - 2007.04.02 11:33:00 - [24] Edited by: mr bighelmet on 02/04/2007 11:29:19 the moment a system hit 200 player cut down all unnescery calculation. No tracer, no missile explosion, no NPC. system hit 300, no guns, no belts, cut down anything u can spare. If i post something smart it represent my corp and alliance all other posts are my feeling/ideas only and do not represnt the rest
Amitabh Bachchan	Posted - 2007.04.02 11:36:00 - [25] Originally by: Gabriel Karade Originally by: Amitabh Bachchan Originally by: Gabriel Karade Pretty much what they are doing at the moment, come up with new mechanics to POS warfare so you donÆt need an uberblob to achieve anything. Plus I'd change super-capital construction to being spread across multiple arrays in multiple systems - to build the final ship you have to drag the parts to a planet in freighters much like an outpost egg then wait for Downtime and out pops a ship ready for boarding. It wont solve the problem, only transfer it! A ship can only be built at the speed of its slowest part. So insted of a Giant Blob once, you will get a Giant Blob many times. The Correct way to attack is lockdown the system in advance and then send in capitals. E.G EC-P incident. Otherwise Capital ships WILL die by the dozen. Why blob one system when you can spread out and hit multiple ones at the same time? All of which are critical to building the ship. At the moment there is no incentive because there is just one target in one system. If there is multiple systems, then the attackers will blob each once at a time to guarentee the highest chance of sucsess. And if CCP used your idea, since a ship is built as fast as the slowest component, there is no incentive to attack more than 1 pos. You really think people would break up their gangs and fly in smaller groups?
Verone Veto. Veto Corp	Posted - 2007.04.02 11:38:00 - [26] I'd hire 150 psychotic sado masochist dominatrixes (like lucy liu in that Mel Gibson movie Payback) to beat, whip and do things of a carnal nature to the Development team until they fixed the coding and all this POS malarkey. >>> THE BEAUTY OF NEW EDEN <<<
Dr Slaughter Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.04.02 12:05:00 - [27] Originally by: Verone I'd hire 150 psychotic sado masochist dominatrixes (like lucy liu in that Mel Gibson movie Payback) to beat, whip and do things of a carnal nature to the Development team until they fixed the coding and all this POS malarkey. That sounds like much more fun than playing EvE. Where can I sign up to join the dev team?
Bangoura Privateers Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.04.02 12:08:00 - [28] Remove NPC's Would be a crap choice from a business point of view but meh
Afganec Minmatar R.u.S.H. - Fanatics Ultima Rati0	Posted - 2007.04.02 12:39:00 - [29] Edited by: Afganec on 02/04/2007 12:37:15 Since CCP can't handle 1000 people gathering in one system, they should change game mechanics. Titan was supposed to kill blobs, but it just created more blobs, since fleets are not afraid of if, but everyone want to shoot it down. For pvpers there are only 3 'types' of missions. Camping, hunting for hunters and large scale fleet pos wars. Only the third brings win for an alliance. Once CCP gives us targets that will need 1000 people to fight in the whole region to achieve something valuable lag issue is half solved.
Harisdrop Gallente	Posted - 2007.04.02 13:42:00 - [30] I say for every whine post you make you loose the ability to login for 1 week. We then would have less whiners whining on the forums whining that a great game is not upto thier specs...
Miklas Laces A.N.A.R.C.H.I.C.A	Posted - 2007.04.02 14:41:00 - [31] What they're already doing I hope: remove the need for 1500 people to be in a single solar system.
Soporo Caldari	Posted - 2007.04.02 15:09:00 - [32] I would STOP MAKING HUGE ASS SHIPS AND STRUCTURES THAT REQUIRE BLOBS TO HANDLE THEM. The mere rumor of a Titan = zomg lets blob up. Do something about POS spam and idiotic POS warfare. Kill every GSC that hasnt been accesed in 3 months, add a timer. Add 3 times more space to EVE, Empire, LowSec, and 0.0. Boost LowSec. I would sensibly and evenly sprinkle MORE Stations throughout that have MUCH BETTER SERVICES. Spread out agents MUCH MORE EVENLY. You think this is bad? Just wait till we get another few thousand players.
Lord Slater Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2007.04.02 16:02:00 - [33] I would give my BoD friends even more dev powers and send them to Jita to Cull the MIssion runner/belt miner herd. ----------------------------------------------- YYAARRHH HAHAHA IM THE HAPPY PIRATE
Hesed Amarr Hamartia.	Posted - 2007.04.02 16:08:00 - [34] Lower HP, make warpouts take a couple minutes and reduce all ships to 1 gun. - Good. + - Bad.
Esurnir Amarr Bears Inc FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.04.02 16:38:00 - [35] Originally by: Lord Slater I would give my BoD friends even more dev powers and send them to Jita to Cull the MIssion runner/belt miner herd. Which belt ? ---- Quote: Thou shall pew pew. Book of Revelation 12, 51
SeigneurDesMysteres	Posted - 2007.04.02 17:33:00 - [36] Make more high quality lvl 4 agents and then move them into the lowest populated empire regions then at least people would disperse.
Rod Blaine Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.04.02 17:37:00 - [37] Find (fund ?) a way to have a node/system supported by two cpu's instead of the current maximum of one. Many of the nodes don't work near full strain I bet> having the ability to buff one to twice the current max strength would make a large difference. Bsides that, I'm still waiting for that "no models or any effects at all" setting for uber-lag emergencies to be made available. I know it's not pretty, but any fight at a pos currently lags to hell and back. At least let us remove pos's from the actual view and reduce the modules to overview icons when required. [center] Old blog
Wadaya Caldari Trailerpark Industries	Posted - 2007.04.02 17:55:00 - [38] Delete the accounts of all players who do not know the difference between lose and loose. After that we can negotiate terms for Lucy Liu and her Dominatrix team. Wad
Lucius Ventrue Minmatar Resurrection R i s e	Posted - 2007.04.02 18:11:00 - [39] take some profits and invest in quantum processor design, be the first MMO to use the technology Fleet Commander (V) Fear maxed leadership bonuses! Kill Profile http://eve-rise.coldpoetry.com/killboard/?a=pilot_detail&
Malcolm Gerwulf	Posted - 2007.04.02 18:11:00 - [40] Best way to reduce lag: Create more universes (realms). As a very new player I was surprised to see there is only 1 server to play on, Tranquility. The test server doesn't count in my opinion. As you can tell I played WoW and I very much enjoyed the thrill of starting a new character on a new realm before people have had a chance to take the economy to the endgame. Now I realize that there are fundamental differences between the EVE skill system/economy and other MMOs, but I have thought this through and I personally believe that at least 1 additional fresh server would be a good thing for the game. Splitting the playerbase between servers would certainly reduce the overall lag in my estimation, however there would still be massive fleet battles that would bog down the hardware. The new server would not have all the baggage of remnants from previous patches, and the ISK/Character sellers would not be present initally. Just some random thoughts, take it or leave it. I'll say again that I understand that EVE is fundamentally different and I can see why they have lumped everything together in one server. 30,000 simultaneous players is impressive for any server cluster.
Dread Operative SniggWaffe Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2007.04.02 18:13:00 - [41] Edited by: Dread Operative on 02/04/2007 18:10:27 5000 wonderful systems of 0.0 space. Gets rid of Concord and sentry guns and all that security stuff.
Galk Gallente Autumn Tactics All the things she said	Posted - 2007.04.02 18:17:00 - [42] Entering the spirt of the majority of the replies. 'I were ccp' Tbh i wouldn't deviate all that much from what they actualy do. Continue to play people with promises and initiatives....when it starts to get sticky... either announce new hardware.... or go into the big group hug testing session again.... and ofcourse continuing with positive comments.... recordbreakers.. 30* k online only at 50% capacity ect... huge 1000 player fleet ect ect.... In a set closed community... most of which desiring to continue with their adiction...initiatives.. promises.. new hardware ect... positive interaction from the developers.. is exactly what i would do in there situation. As for a constructive feasible fix to all problems... i don't have an answer... only a reasonable opinion. Add everything together.... 1000 player fights... one server network banded together often holding 30 times that. Ask yourself why other developers don't aim for that sort of structure. ______
Kurlieu Gallente The Ore House	Posted - 2007.04.02 18:26:00 - [43] I'd try moving all the trading/buying/selling data to a separate set of servers not associated with combat/ship info. My main is a trader/industrialist and it takes forever to get data. Yes, my system is the latest and greatest, btw. I also think I'd move the voice channel elsewhere or get rid of it all together. I realize it represents a revenue stream, but I won't go past my 30 day voice trial unless things improve. Obviously they need to look at the code. In some other MMORPGs (been playing EQ for 7+ years) you have the option of turning off all the explosions and colored lights etc. That might help. I suppose it could be set that it turns off automatically after 50 players are reached. I think large fleet engagements (500+) need to be kept in game at the expense of some other "frills".
OberFuhrer Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2007.04.02 18:31:00 - [44] I loved being out in 0.0 and engaging in massive fleet battles, but two main reasons pulled me away from that: 1. Real life issues and I would not have a lot of time at all to play. 2. Lag inevitably caused by doing the thing I loved: fleet battles and knowing it was not going to get fixed anytime soon. #1 was the main one, but I also realized that if #2 wouldn't get fixed, then was even the point? CCP wants more people to play this game because it's their product(or is it a service? maybe both ) and they bring in $$$ selling it. So like any normal business, more customers = more $$$. I think CCP realizes the problem but what I'm not sure of is if they realize they will have to take the long hard road to fix this if they wish to bring in more customers AND offer a superior product/service. That "long hard road" I spoke of is having to entirely re-code Eve altogether. Many here say "Build a new patch" or "Add more powerful servers" in order to fix the problem. That won't work. The underlying code and database structure was not designed to handle this many people lag-free. It may have been CCP didn't anticipate this many people signing up or their coders just didn't think far enough ahead or may have been drunk. Who knows. Right now there's two ways of trying to fix this: 1. Throw more powerful hardware at it. I think we've all seen how well this works. 2. Bite the bullet and start coding a new Eve that can handle 100,000+ players online simultaneously. #2 is your only real solution. No it will not be easy. This will take maybe 2-3 years to accomplish. But I think we can safely say that running on Windows/SoL in this manner, for this type of clustering needed on a MSSQL database structure is NOT going to get it. Now I'm not a mmorpg programmer and one mmo may work great on one platform and not so well on another, but I think it's safe to say Eve does not run well on this platform. For the amount and level of complexity involved I'd suggest an Oracle cluster on OpenMosix or AIX. As I said, fleet battles I loved and I think most everyone who PvPs does too if they just didn't have that damn lag. Could you imagine a 500v500 battle lag free? WOW that would be awesome! In order to accomplish that, start by scrapping the current system of blocking. Whether it's pulling up a market order, clicking someone's bio, activating a weapon, that's essentially blocking. When a call goes out like that to the Eve server the client waits for content to be generated (the response). So nothing can be done really until it's finished. Ever notice you can't close that market window either until it's done? heh... Instead of that one idea would be to just send the first few bits of metadata and stream in the rest without blocking other operations. CCP is still using essentially a 'star' structure for the cluster. I don't think so. A cluster doesn't really seem to be accurate at this point I think because if it were you could offload system processing to certain segments and introduce new content on other segments only the devs were using at that point. This is one reason for the daily downtime, but you can also notice that CCP can only introduce new content during downtime. If you can't dynamically allocate resources as they are needed, such as by player load and not by systems/regions, there's little hope for the future. So as I said, the foundation of the Eve core has already been built and to start again will be a monumental effort. So do you either bite the bullet now and try again or wait a couple years until we get lag such what's in Motsu/Saila/Jita or any 0.0 system with a few hundred people in all systems in Eve?
Miranda Ceres	Posted - 2007.04.02 18:48:00 - [45] The ability for systems to span more than one physical system perhaps? Or perhaps introduce a certain number of hardware systems that are a lot more powerful than the standard hardware nodes. As I understand it, they're dual processor opterons at the moment... perhaps some dual processor, quad core core 2 duo machines which busy systems (or systems that are expected to be busy) can be placed on, all to themselves.
Miranda Ceres	Posted - 2007.04.02 18:48:00 - [46] The ability for systems to span more than one physical system perhaps? Or perhaps introduce a certain number of hardware systems that are a lot more powerful than the standard hardware nodes. As I understand it, they're dual processor opterons at the moment... perhaps some dual processor, quad core core 2 duo machines which busy systems (or systems that are expected to be busy) can be placed on, all to themselves.
Jollyreaper Gallente Ace Adventure Corp	Posted - 2007.04.02 18:56:00 - [47] I would say that warp drives cause eddies in space-time. If too many ships are blobbed together, you incrase the chance of artificially inducing the creation of a black hole. No more than 100 friggies or 10 dreads in a blob, balance out the exact ratios to make for fair combat. So as not to totally punk players, maybe not make the hole destroy the ships but just fling them out of warp all across the system, maybe into adjoining systems and reduce server load. If combined with the declared warzone idea (when big blob comes to attack defended system, GM declares warzone rules that evacuate non-blob ships and admits ships into combat proportional to the size of the blob. If attacker has 2000 ships and defender has 1000, then the fight is 200 vs 100 with new ships admitted from blob as combatants are killed.) Is this an ideal solution. No. But until CCP can support unlimited blobs...
Jollyreaper Gallente Ace Adventure Corp	Posted - 2007.04.02 18:56:00 - [48] Edited by: Jollyreaper on 02/04/2007 19:01:55 I would say that warp drives cause eddies in space-time. If too many ships are blobbed together, you increase the chance of artificially inducing the creation of a black hole. No more than 100 friggies or 10 dreads in a blob, balance out the exact ratios to make for fair combat. So as not to totally punk players, maybe not make the hole destroy the ships but just fling them out of warp all across the system, maybe into adjoining systems and reduce server load. If combined with the declared warzone idea (when big blob comes to attack defended system, GM declares warzone rules that evacuate non-blob ships and admits ships into combat proportional to the size of the blob. If attacker has 2000 ships and defender has 1000, then the fight is 200 vs 100 with new ships admitted from blob as combatants are killed.) Is this an ideal solution. No. But until CCP can support unlimited blobs...
Danton Marcellus Nebula Rasa Holdings	Posted - 2007.04.02 19:56:00 - [49] Originally by: Roy Batty68 Turn off automatic market refresh. Less queries = less server load. Start chipping away at the small things that add up. For less load also kill the map, let people compile this info themselves. Also Known As
Wataru Amnesia Amarr Trifecta	Posted - 2007.04.02 19:58:00 - [50] Edited by: Wataru Amnesia on 02/04/2007 20:02:31 Possible Hardware for eve-cluster-nodes: Put 12 PS3 together, install Gentoo, compile 5 months until the perfect database-cluster-crossplattform-network-server is finished and then watch how 3000 ships can fly in space with almost no lag at all on that node. You can also take the new Sun-Blades with the Cell-CPU¦s, just make sure that you do no longer support the old x86 stupidity of political warfare and the WTO:-) I really would love to have their Blade-Centers:-), but it is not the best hardware for such a big Database-query based Game-Engine. Also the SSD¦s are nice and expensive, but noone can tell me that a well setuped SAS-Storage is slower in the overall Data-Bandwhich and i would say it is even cheaper then SSD¦s. Another example: People who know the powers of a new Apple Quadro-Xeon-Server could probable set up the whole eve-management system on one single server. With a nice 10GB-Fibre-Storage behind it for static data and the alrdy in place Blade-Centers as Clients of the new Management-Server the Overall Performance of Eve will be dramatically raised. There are many ways to raise the performance on the Hardware-side. Of Course a reprogramming of the whole system is also always a way to reach new goals ¦nd Game-engines which will work much better. Good luck on your upcoming Network/Hardware Decisions ccp and send out some Counselors to ask the big old Wise Joveans about the ultimative Database-Server:-)
Jimer Lins Gallente Sanctuary	Posted - 2007.04.02 20:40:00 - [51] Originally by: Phelan Lore Make Jita 0.0 O_O o_O O_o >_< Actually... that would be really funny if Jita became 0.0 for say, 10 minutes a day? We could call it "10 minutes hate". OK, I've had too much coffee.
Mroe Bree Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2007.04.02 21:13:00 - [52] As has been pointed out before, the problem is not the code or optimization. It's the combinatorial explosion of data from N players having to be processed and delivered to M other players. If there is one player generating 100 bytes of traffic to go back and forth, 2 players will cause 400. 3 will generate 800. Etc. Basically since you have to send the actions of each player to each and every other player participating in the battle, never mind process the server end of it, you will very quickly overwhelm the current state of the art in terms of computing, throughput and other limitations in very short order once you go from tens of people in a battle to thousands. The solution is not necessarily just code optimizations. Even if you improve the server performance an order of magnitude it'll only take another few hundred additional players to put you right back into the same amount of computation/bandwith utilization as you had before. The solution is re-designing the current megablob-requiring battle mechanics like POSes and Titans. The devs have mentioned this already -- they wish to design goals which can be accomplished by smaller teams of just you and a couple of buddies, not just a megablob. The megablob may also be possible if fleet mechanics change to something like fleet ships combining into one supership. Aggregation is a way to deal with combinatorial explosions. Anyway. The devs are working on it. Give em time.
Barbarellas Daughter Lonely Barbarella	Posted - 2007.04.02 22:30:00 - [53] Introduce reinforced mode for nodes! If a node hits 500 players: - fleets wont give bonuses anymore - market is turned off (sucks to be jita ) - all NPCs, roids, cans removed on this node - "show info" on a pilot doesnt work anymore - P&P/bookmarks disabled (no strategical BMs for blobs) - damage will only be calculated every 5 seconds additional ideas: - if you enter a node with 500+ pilots, you have to pay ISK for every minute you stay on the node - every pilot on a 500+ node receives (number of players - 500) hitpoints per second - make the node consume strontium clathrates which the DEVs will have to haul to the node in order to keep it alive
Misanth	Posted - 2007.04.02 23:46:00 - [54] Edited by: Misanth on 02/04/2007 23:44:44 1) Introduce Mobile Jump Drives. 2) Make capital ships be constructed in pieces. 3) Give a 5min converted aggression timer on log-on and log-off. ------------------------- 1 - Only for t2 ships cruiser- and bs-size tho. (HAC, Recon, Cmd Ship, and future BC/Battleships). This would make small skirmish groups alot more viable warfare; and yet the biggest ships would still need cyno, while the cyno frigs still need to use warpgates. Make cyno only viable for certain shiptypes. Covert Ops already got a bonus on it, not totally off track imho. Say t2 frigs. 2 - This allows for more widespread shipyards, less risk you lose that Titan or Mothership or whatnot that you are building, in a single attack. I.e. less need for a massive offensive/defensive fleet, and an option for simultaneously/joint attacks on several at the same time (i.e. spread out fleets). 3 - I.e. logging off will make your ship/pod visible on radar for 5mins after you log off. Logging in a station or POS would ofc make you 'safe' from this. Logging-on-traps gets more and more common tho, with people having intel of incoming attacks they just log off a fleet a certain point and -boom- log them in all at once when they want to defend. Give all people that log in a 5min timer where they cannot attack (or interact with POSes) but they can be attacked. This will make logging in stations and POSes alot more attractive again as well as making these traps crap for combat. They might lag you but you can shoot them down while they just sit there (and they can't log off without having their ship around). Can probably get a couple of more ideas, but that's the first ones I'd like to see.
Eralus	Posted - 2007.04.03 00:12:00 - [55] This isn't a software optimization problem. This is a software design problem. - Segregate software functions. Anything market/contract/mail/skill training/petition/etc related should be done on separate computers from flying around and shooting. In fact, it should all be done through an HTTP interface and the client's HTTP interface should go directly from the client to the web server. - Segregate priorty vs. non-priority functions. Things like talking on local should be separated onto different servers than combat, and should update X times per second instead of real time (That's close to real time, but not all the time.) They should also only happen after combat is done. - Make the battle computation scalable by a quantity smaller than a system. A grid would be a good start. The fact that a system can't be handled by more than one node is the fundamental problem. - Reduce communication. When 600 ships get in the same spot, don't 'inform' every ship of every other ship's actions. If I activate a smartbomb, figure out which ships are nearby and compute the effect for them, and ignore the rest. But, these are fundamental design changes. Since EVE wasn't built to work this way, I don't know that it's practical to change it. _____ Lifewire is a big, ugly, mean... carebear.
Aphotic Raven Gallente E X O D U S Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2007.04.03 00:41:00 - [56] Get rid of POS's... they are choking the life out of this game. Im not sure what you would replace them with though.. so hats off to CCP if they can figure out a nice medium... a quick fix might be getting rid of POS SOV and making them less of an impregnable fortress to small gangs... even a gang of 30~ with close range Bs's takes AGES to kill a small pos... and unless its housing valuable jewels then you're destroying less than a bil in assets... and dont start me on **in stront -_- Originally by:** Dr Cupid Let me tell you all that I'm really enjoying eve-beta, and can't wait for the real game to come out!
Thread Winner Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2007.04.03 01:11:00 - [57] Apply Huge Magnets to the servers
Kylar Renpurs	Posted - 2007.04.03 01:26:00 - [58] I'd bring in deteriorating cans,, give them a lifetime of 2 months or so,, so at least the abandoned ones would get deleted (i know a few of my stashes in 0.0 are still floating around after hasty exits). Prolly nerf the amount of eyecandy in missions too.
Del Narveux Obsidian Angels Enterprises	Posted - 2007.04.03 01:38:00 - [59] 1. Make decent ore spawn in caldari/minnie space. Theres tons of untouched belts in those areas that arent being used, and lots in the south crowded with miners, and all of that = lag. 2. Fewer but stronger, this applies to both roids and especially misison NPCs. Seriously 10000000000 frigates for a lowly level 2 mission is seriously messed up. So, make them fewer in number, but stronger and better rewards etc to compensate. Obviously this needs to be done in such a way that people who dont have uber skills dont get nerfed, but this is trivial (e.g. easy and hard mission options, or something). 3. Nerf voice chat. It lags, and no one uses it anyway. 4. Add a few more complexes, and move the agents around a bit more. Its not that theres not enough empire space, its that resources arent spread out very well. Seriously theres hundreds of empty 0.5-0.6 systems, move some of the stuff away from 'omgblob ore/npc/mission hub' constellations into less utilized areas. Add more regions if necessary, but I doubt it is...point is lots of low-load nodes will run quicker than a few overcrowded ones. Warp to 0km and jumpclones means travel isnt such a big problem anymore. _________________ [SAK] Alumnus--And Proud Of It! -- aka Cpt Bogus Is that my torped sig cloaking your base? Originally by: Wrangler Well, at least we have forum PvP..
Andargor theWise Collateral Damage Unlimited Insomnia.	Posted - 2007.04.03 03:24:00 - [60] I usually find negative comments about others distasteful, but frankly I'm getting tired of the same repetitive inane comments made by people who really have no idea what a project like Eve entails. I will save you reading the junk twice, and just highlight the nuggets instead of quoting. To whit, a summary of comments from probable future Darwin Award winners (i.e. NOT realistic): * Devs must stop playing the game (lol, how do you make a product that you don't know or use?) * Having "better" developers hired (c'mon...) * Taking some of the content people and moving them to the department responsible for fixing bugs (apple, meet orange) * Getting rid/calling upon the help/ostracizing players that use "dev hax" (lol) * Putting artificial caps on system population (solves the symptom temporarily, but induces a host of other complication when players use the mechanic to their advantage) * Putting in "better" hardware/bigger nodes (AFAIK, and that's saying much, CCP's cluster is top-of-the-line) * Putting in more nodes (will not fix 1500-pilot gang in 1 system) * Changing the OS (means rewrite, and that's not an option) * Getting rid of missions/pirates/rats/low-sec/high-sec (Eve is a sandbox that caters to many gameplay styles that need to be balanced, so live with it) * More servers (shards, sorry, not going to happen; it won't be Eve) Now, to those suggestions players have made which actually make sense. I again will provide condense summaries: * Change the player's behavior by favoring certain actions and discouraging others (e.g. anti-blob weapons, better fleet control, Interbus, agents, etc.) * Optimizing the code for faster execution, use performance profiling * Optimizing the UI to reduce the amount of server-side processing by either performing tasks locally, or minimizing the steps required to accomplish a task * Have redundant content disappear or be forcibly removed (e.g. anchored cans) * Optimize the client-server communications to eliminate unnecessary transactions (which translate into lag when you multiply by latency) * Optimize the cluster architecture (proxy/app servers/DB) * Investigate peer-to-peer mechanisms with distributed processing a la S.E.T.I (take advantage of player's processing power, at the cost of integrity checking; a hybrid model could be envisaged where non-lag critical computations could be pushed out to the clients, while freeing the cluster for real-time operations) * Turn off some features when a system is particularly loaded to avoid unnecessary calculations I'll throw in a few of my ideas (maybe not original), so you can freely insult me about them: * Restructure the one-system/one-node mapping, which is wasteful on resources and has an inherent performance cap at the processor level. Have the entire cluster server the entire needs of all connected players by truly distributing processing to all nodes. There is an inter-node communications overhead between the "supervisor" and "child" processes, but it would easily be balanced by a far more efficient aggregate use of nodes. Hardware upgrades would truly be directly reflected in a performance gain for all. * Investigate in WOC (WAN Optimization Controller) code, also called "network accelerator" code. I was skeptical about the efficiency of this, but recent lab tests have shown me this is a very viable technology, and possibly the future of high-performance networking. - Got grief? Revelations MySQL Database
Erala Strae	Posted - 2007.04.03 06:00:00 - [61] Originally by: Gaius BaItar One way to reduce lag is to reduce the amount of time that is spent on the server side, calculating trajectories, distances and different parameters related to ships and systems. This could be done by reallocating some of this calculation to clientÆs computers. Considering the power of PCs today, imagine how much this would free the server. Less work for server means more available power to serve more clients, thus less lag. ♥
Max Hardcase Art of War Cult of War	Posted - 2007.04.03 07:00:00 - [62] Drones.
Torm Ilmater No Quarter.	Posted - 2007.04.03 07:41:00 - [63] Seriously CCP needs to just rewrite a lot of the node allocation code so that nodes can be allocated in a more dynamic fashion. The lag has been around for so long now it's getting to be almost laughable that they don't even seem to be considering this option.
Chequrself Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.04.03 07:47:00 - [64] Dunno if this has been said but get rid of the npc traders in empire, wtf are they for anyways. Also make high traffic systems, coughjitacough, either stations jetison undock you 500km in a random direction or like Sweden, neutral territory where no war dec fighting can place, bye bye lag campers. -----------------------------------------------------------------
Sal Alo Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2007.04.03 14:13:00 - [65] Split eve playerbase into 4 or X separate "servers". I know we all love to play eve togheter but, at least for the moment, we have poor performance, specially when we talk about fleet battles. CCP is writing a new graphical engine, it should re-write the whole game thinking at big fleet battles and new technologies (you know 4 years are a lot of time in computer science world), then put we all back to a "single server". It could take some years. Ok I have no hurry, I just started capital ship training, but I'll really want to be able to see my dread shooting without have to zoom out the game! My 2 (euro)cents. Whoever is afraid of death dies every day. Whoever isn't, dies only once.
Terradoct Gallente shock-WAVE corp.	Posted - 2007.04.03 14:51:00 - [66] Now what would you do to reduce lag? I would removed many atributes from the game freeing some CPU time, for expl. this tracking thing, just add that if target has less signuture than minimal weapon resolution then weapon would not be activateted. And many other thing from market and so on. There a many usless data to process, wich makes all this lag-thing.
galadran Caldari The Power of 3	Posted - 2007.04.03 16:03:00 - [67] Ideas which could work (not fully inclusional): 1. 1+ nodes to a system (ie node a grid) 2. Pushing non-important calculations to Clients (CSHD in PS) 3. Removing non-combat systems when in a stressed node 4. Hardened Client 5. QoS clusterside setup 4 explained: A eve client that has a following changes: - No textures for anything - no face rendering - no market, wallet, corp, assets, charactersheet or other non-combat functions - map is reduced to 2d, very basic (no spinning) - the models are massively simplified ie; stargate becomes yellow colured "melon" ships are reduced to different blobs coloured to their type 5 explained: A soloution to network lag. On a node/nodes with a large battle going on the packets coming out of it have their prority set as 1. This means a router will process all these packets before any non-combat ones. So 10 000 ppl requesting the market will have to wait while the 1500 player battle happens. It would bot be a complete cutoff but it would ensure that at any bottleneck, the important stuff gets through. Now we just need the devs to read this thread
Lemen Meringue Cult of Lemen	Posted - 2007.04.03 16:06:00 - [68] Redesign the code to be massively parallel, get rid of the individual nodes, and use the whole cluster as a giant SC to run the entire galaxy. Huge fights would slow down the whole system, but you'd be able to draw computing power from the whole cluster rather than a single node for fleet fights. They would then call this "EVE 2".
galadran Caldari The Power of 3	Posted - 2007.04.03 16:08:00 - [69] That would never work. They would need fiber optics for every node. otherwise the server would be slowed down by network bottlenecks.
OneSock PLuSQuAMPERFEkT iNc	Posted - 2007.04.03 16:47:00 - [70] When in range of a large number of other ships targeting sensors are overwhelmed and thus your locking range is reduced or lock time increased. (Or something else of a similar nature). Should discourage blobing on the same grid.
Lemen Meringue Cult of Lemen	Posted - 2007.04.03 18:24:00 - [71] Originally by: galadran That would never work. They would need fiber optics for every node. otherwise the server would be slowed down by network bottlenecks. What, you mean clustering? Someone tell the world that their clusters don't work anymore!
Anaalys Fluuterby Caldari	Posted - 2007.04.03 18:53:00 - [72] Originally by: galadran That would never work. They would need fiber optics for every node. otherwise the server would be slowed down by network bottlenecks. Hate to tell you this but the backbone on those blade servers is a LOT faster than fiber optic connections between them.... <-----------> Keiron: http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=427556&page=2 PvE and/or PvP is not something that appeals to the entire player base

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [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.