EVE Search - Please fix the lag in Jita/Motsu/etc.

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Please fix the lag in Jita/Motsu/etc.

» 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 - 11 post(s)
Vincent Lionhart	Posted - 2007.04.07 03:00:00 - [1] This area is lagging like hell, everyone knows, CCP knows: do something about it because a lot of the players are most likely getting ****ed off. Either move the agents or add more command agents before people start quitting out of frustration.
Barbarellas Daughter Lonely Barbarella	Posted - 2007.04.07 03:06:00 - [2] Edited by: Barbarellas Daughter on 07/04/2007 03:03:01 They already removed the roid belts and a jump gate(?) from Jita. If you move the agents, those who do missions for these agents will be frustrated. My bet is they wait for the LP-pool before removing agents from Jita. edit: But i dont think it will help to reduce lag significantially (is this a word?? )
Vincent Lionhart	Posted - 2007.04.07 03:17:00 - [3] It's the areas near Jita. A lot of people are spamming Command agent missions because there is only one high quality Caldari Navy one in Motsu. And there's also a few other ones that are near this area. They need to either 1. move the agents around, 2. add more command agents. Neither will do any harm to the game besides stop ppl from getting ****ed off.
Orion Eridanus Dark Nova Crisis	Posted - 2007.04.07 08:29:00 - [4] Don't log on tommorow then, you won't like it at all. WANTED: Someone to go to Jita with me. This is not a joke. Eve mail me PO BOX snip Ashela, Genesis. You'll get paid after we get back. Must bring own ship. Safety not guaranteed.
Dred'Pirate Jesus Amarr Ministry of War	Posted - 2007.04.07 08:36:00 - [5] Jita That should be a banned word I say.. I'd say some logical stuff about what you can do with your lag but after an indefinable amount of threads over this very subject I'll pass.. Originally by: David Hackworth ò If you find yourself in a fair fight, you didn't plan your mission properly.
Kainite M'alachi	Posted - 2007.04.07 09:14:00 - [6] simple fix for yourself, forget ure lps and find another lvl 4 agent in a quite system and enjoy lag free gaming :)and before u say about lps i did the same thing from lageken and it made this game so much easier to log and know lag isnt going to stop me from earning some iskes. i would never run missions where local is packed, and anyone new going there needs there head seeing to. its your choice to run that popular agent, so you choice to play in lag hell oh and moving agents only moves the lag... hageken moved agents about and where did that lvl 4 go ? motsu, simply cut ure losses and find a better area with a decent agent theres plenty out there :)
Akita T Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2007.04.07 09:46:00 - [7] Yes, please fix the lag in Motsu and vicinity... by moving ALL L4 agents from there at least 5 jumps away in random directions. _ MySkills \| Module/Rig stacknerfing explained
Marquis Dean The Last Thing You'll Ever See	Posted - 2007.04.07 09:59:00 - [8] If everyone posts on the forums about it, the problem fixes itself by cosmic balance! --- Originally by: CCP Sharkbait will explain when i have the time i promise
F90OEX	Posted - 2007.04.07 10:12:00 - [9] You have to wonder what genius over at CCP thought of putting the highest Cmd lvl 4 Caldari Navy agents right beside the busiest marketplace system in Eve. CCP talk about all the great features they have coming down the rd, but yet the very problem that effects nearly every player at some one in time, they say silent about. I wish we could make a Poll and show CCP about amount of ppl who are effected by heavy lag, it be an eye opener for them. Anyone who has sense knows to stay away from Jita and surrounding systems over the weekend, because its so bad, its unplayable.
Fswd	Posted - 2007.04.07 10:14:00 - [10] Dont go to jita --- So I flame and troll when the occasion calls for it. So what are you gonna do about it?
Sinder Ohm Infinite Improbability Inc Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2007.04.07 11:13:00 - [11] Edited by: Sinder Ohm on 07/04/2007 11:10:24 Dont follow the other sheep and go to Jita and Motsu, if you took the trouble to explore abit you would find areas that are just as good. btw Motsu does NOT have the best caldari agent, 11 jumps away is a beter one. doh spelling edit.

CCP Sharkbait	Posted - 2007.04.07 13:50:00 - [12] jita - agent and market hub motsu - agent hub saila - agent hub we are looking into more changes, but at the moment there is nothing that can be done. the load/lag is causes by the amount of people trading or doing missions in the system and every play has the same right to be there as anyone else. the only way to clear the lag from the systems at the moment is to move the agents away from them. if we do that then we are just movingthe load to another system. there is alot of effort, both in code and worldshaping (balancing the map) to sort these systems out. we made changes for revelations 1.3 and they did have a big impact, altho you can't see it so clearly, we can. basically all i can suggest for the time being is to avoid the systems.

Marquis Dean The Last Thing You'll Ever See	Posted - 2007.04.07 14:05:00 - [13] Originally by: CCP Sharkbait jita - agent and market hub motsu - agent hub saila - agent hub we are looking into more changes, but at the moment there is nothing that can be done. the load/lag is causes by the amount of people trading or doing missions in the system and every play has the same right to be there as anyone else. the only way to clear the lag from the systems at the moment is to move the agents away from them. if we do that then we are just movingthe load to another system. there is alot of effort, both in code and worldshaping (balancing the map) to sort these systems out. we made changes for revelations 1.3 and they did have a big impact, altho you can't see it so clearly, we can. basically all i can suggest for the time being is to avoid the systems. Sharky we've been waiting for a Dev response to this issue for... months at least. Thankyou. --- Originally by: CCP Sharkbait will explain when i have the time i promise
Velsharoon Gallente Endgame.	Posted - 2007.04.07 14:12:00 - [14] To much trouble to create 2-4 new agents, copy the lps to one randomly and make up some rp to explain a move? This would be a simple server hotfix no?
Pooka Caldari United Space Aillance USA	Posted - 2007.04.07 14:23:00 - [15] Though CCP said we were to control the eCommerce. You say CCP needs to move Jita because it is too busy. ThatÆs like saying move Los Vegas because it is too busy. When the players get tried of the gate gangs and the scams, they will move somewhere else. If you donÆt like it and the lag move south, nobodyÆs down here. PROMISES MADE PROMISES KEPT Word: p·ca (POO-kuh) [pu:k@] Meaning: p·ca = goblin, sp

CCP Sharkbait	Posted - 2007.04.07 14:29:00 - [16] Originally by: Marquis Dean Sharky we've been waiting for a Dev response to this issue for... months at least. Thankyou. i have responded on this quite a few times i believe. what i will try and do today as i'm looking into this all now, is get some numbers on whats happening in the systems. Originally by: Velsharoon To much trouble to create 2-4 new agents, copy the lps to one randomly and make up some rp to explain a move? This would be a simple server hotfix no? this might work tbh and it's something i have thought about suggesting. but my main fear again is moving the load not reducing it. i'm trying to come up with something that will not move the load but help reduce it. on the changes for revelations 1.3 we made, we added a bypass route for jita. jita's jump count went down from about 22k per day to something about 14k per day. but the same amount of missions and market trading was not reduced. there is a system that has taken the load from jita, it's jump count went from 5k per day to 14k per day. but this is pure pass through load that we have removed from jita and moved to another system that can take the extra load. that is something i kinda hoped might happen, but not on the scale it did. so i was quite happy with that tbh. also since the changes other systems mission completed count has gone up while the systems here have gone down alittle. we are getting numbers and trying to work out whats going to happen before we make any changes. it's important that we know whats going on to be able to make the changes. we are looking into this, we just want to get it done right and make it a more perma thing. i will post more information and plans as we have them

Rhaegor Stormborn	Posted - 2007.04.07 14:35:00 - [17] Originally by: Barbarellas Daughter If you move the agents, those who do missions for these agents will be frustrated. So?

CCP Sharkbait	Posted - 2007.04.07 14:38:00 - [18] Originally by: Rhaegor Stormborn Originally by: Barbarellas Daughter If you move the agents, those who do missions for these agents will be frustrated. So? so i don't want to annoy people. therefore i will try and come up with a better solution to the problem. we are also changing and optimizing code and stuff. this will also help and i would expect to see stuff happening over the next few months. we already have some in testing, but as they are low level changes we need to be sure they are working.

Jotan Veer Slaughterhouse	Posted - 2007.04.07 16:08:00 - [19] Everybody is up in arms when I tell them that I'm working for a quality minus 18 level 4 agent (base quality before skills and standing). Yes, the LP blows but having a total of 3 people in local max + not having to deal with CCP's brilliant sadistic creation known as jamming guristas (caldari agent not in caldari space) worth EVERY LAST ONE of those lost LPs.
Dagle Minmatar Sanctuary Re	Posted - 2007.04.07 16:16:00 - [20] Edited by: Dagle on 07/04/2007 16:13:44 Originally by: Kainite M'alachi simple fix for yourself, forget ure lps and find another lvl 4 agent in a quite system and enjoy lag free gaming :)and before u say about lps i did the same thing from lageken and it made this game so much easier to log and know lag isnt going to stop me from earning some iskes. i would never run missions where local is packed, and anyone new going there needs there head seeing to. its your choice to run that popular agent, so you choice to play in lag hell oh and moving agents only moves the lag... hageken moved agents about and where did that lvl 4 go ? motsu, simply cut ure losses and find a better area with a decent agent theres plenty out there :) I agree here. I used to run missions in the Motsu Triangle. Lag was a pain so I took the next decent offer from each agent, sold those and moved my operations. I now run missions for a lv 4 Quality 16 Legal agent in Caldari space and earn more LP and isk in less time. I got a CNR BPC from another lv 4 Q 12 agent in Kor-Azor space. There are some lessons that "kill" mission runners should learn. 1. Any corp will give you a CNR bpc, not just Caldari Navy. 2. Courier missions are fairly rare for most agents. The percentages listed for courier missions on EveInfo are not accurate. For example, EveInfo shows Legal agents give 50/50 kill & courier. Yet I get 2 maybe 3 courier missions out of every 16. That's only 15-20%. 3. Today's courier missions are not a hinderance to do quickly. They are at most 3-4 jumps and only have 1 delivery. It takes 10-15 minutes to do one and the most you'll see outside a storyline is 7k cargo (can be done in a grade 1 industrial with expanders using 3-4h training time). An occassional courier mission is a blip on earning isk/lp capacity. They're just too infrequent and too quick/easy to do. 4. System security has a much larger impact on LP than base agent quality. Nevertheless, if CCP decided to "clone" the Motsu triangle agents & move them, it wouldn't be a terrible short term solution. The Motsu runner could be given a one time option to move his LP to one of the new agents of his choice. In the long run, I don't think that is the solution though. Personally, I do think an overhaul of the agent division system is in order. I think there should be 4 categories: A. Security-Command (95% kill) B. Administration (75% kill/25% courier) C. Fed-Ex (100% courier) D. R&D That alone would not solve the mindless crush to go to highest quality Command agents, so simply remove impact of quality and system sec status. Have a baseline LP award for each mission (set maybe around where a Q10 agent in .6 space) and the sole modifier as the social connection skills (3 per instead of current 2 per): A. Security-Command (military/political/bureaucratic) B. Administration (financial/political/military) C. Fed-Ex (trade/financial/labor) D. R&D (high tech/trade/labor)

CCP Sharkbait	Posted - 2007.04.07 16:30:00 - [21] i thing that worries me tbh is that the current agent system was not designed to handle the amount of people that it is having to. there is a change i would like to see but i think it would annoy too many people and will not happen. this is what i would like to see all lv5 agents put into 0.0 all lv4 agents moved to 0.0 and low sec. all lv3 agents moved to 0.2 - 0.6 sec systems. all lv2's and lv1's found in 0.6 and higher. the main reason i would like to see it happen is because i think the current system can't handle the amount of people doing missions (over 110k per day are completed and rising) and with the amount of new people starting and the PCU always on the rise, i think we need to get a new agent system in that will work better with a large online count. now we have the warp to 0 feature ingame, i can't see that this would be a problem tbh. this is just my view and not an offical "this is whats happening n00bs" statement

Andrue Amarr	Posted - 2007.04.07 16:44:00 - [22] Originally by: CCP Sharkbait this is what i would like to see all lv5 agents put into 0.0 all lv4 agents moved to 0.0 and low sec. all lv3 agents moved to 0.2 - 0.6 sec systems. all lv2's and lv1's found in 0.6 and higher. the main reason i would like to see it happen is because i think the current system can't handle the amount of people doing missions (over 110k per day are completed and rising) and with the amount of new people starting and the PCU always on the rise, i think we need to get a new agent system in that will work better with a large online count. now we have the warp to 0 feature ingame, i can't see that this would be a problem tbh. this is just my view and not an offical "this is whats happening n00bs" statement :D] I think that would be bad. There was enough screaming from mission runners when you announced L5 would be low-sec only. Sadly I think it's too late to locate agents as you suggest. I think the root of the problem is the single, agent tied, LP pool. If the LP pool could be tied to a corporation it would allow people to relocate. If you then had far more top level qty agents it would spread people around. But I'm just guessing. I'm a mission runner these days and happily running a high quality L3 agent only a few jumps form Jita with no lag. I know from corp mates that there are some high quality L4 agents in the same area. -- (Battle hardened industrialist) [Brackley, UK] Please don't read this signature.

CCP Sharkbait	Posted - 2007.04.07 16:50:00 - [23] Originally by: Andrue Originally by: CCP Sharkbait this is what i would like to see all lv5 agents put into 0.0 all lv4 agents moved to 0.0 and low sec. all lv3 agents moved to 0.2 - 0.6 sec systems. all lv2's and lv1's found in 0.6 and higher. the main reason i would like to see it happen is because i think the current system can't handle the amount of people doing missions (over 110k per day are completed and rising) and with the amount of new people starting and the PCU always on the rise, i think we need to get a new agent system in that will work better with a large online count. now we have the warp to 0 feature ingame, i can't see that this would be a problem tbh. this is just my view and not an offical "this is whats happening n00bs" statement :D] I think that would be bad. There was enough screaming from mission runners when you announced L5 would be low-sec only. Sadly I think it's too late to locate agents as you suggest. I think the root of the problem is the single, agent tied, LP pool. If the LP pool could be tied to a corporation it would allow people to relocate. If you then had far more top level qty agents it would spread people around. But I'm just guessing. I'm a mission runner these days and happily running a high quality L3 agent only a few jumps form Jita with no lag. I know from corp mates that there are some high quality L4 agents in the same area. yea i do kinda agree with what you said tbh

Alex Tremayne Lyrus Associates	Posted - 2007.04.07 16:51:00 - [24] Originally by: CCP Sharkbait i thing that worries me tbh is that the current agent system was not designed to handle the amount of people that it is having to. there is a change i would like to see but i think it would annoy too many people and will not happen. this is what i would like to see all lv5 agents put into 0.0 all lv4 agents moved to 0.0 and low sec. all lv3 agents moved to 0.2 - 0.6 sec systems. all lv2's and lv1's found in 0.6 and higher. the main reason i would like to see it happen is because i think the current system can't handle the amount of people doing missions (over 110k per day are completed and rising) and with the amount of new people starting and the PCU always on the rise, i think we need to get a new agent system in that will work better with a large online count. now we have the warp to 0 feature ingame, i can't see that this would be a problem tbh. this is just my view and not an offical "this is whats happening n00bs" statement This would be awesome. I truly hope this comes to pass. Lyrus Associates' Diplomat Of Last Resort
Jotan Veer Slaughterhouse	Posted - 2007.04.07 16:54:00 - [25] Edited by: Jotan Veer on 07/04/2007 16:50:12 Originally by: CCP Sharkbait all lv4 agents moved to 0.0 and low sec. Let me know in advance so I can dump my pimp faction fited raven I use for mission running on the market and buy a cheap dominx.

CCP Sharkbait	Posted - 2007.04.07 16:56:00 - [26] it is not something that is happening, it's just my view of something i would like to see done.

Dal Thrax Caldari Multiverse Corporation	Posted - 2007.04.07 16:57:00 - [27] Originally by: CCP Sharkbait i thing that worries me tbh is that the current agent system was not designed to handle the amount of people that it is having to. there is a change i would like to see but i think it would annoy too many people and will not happen. this is what i would like to see all lv5 agents put into 0.0 all lv4 agents moved to 0.0 and low sec. all lv3 agents moved to 0.2 - 0.6 sec systems. all lv2's and lv1's found in 0.6 and higher. the main reason i would like to see it happen is because i think the current system can't handle the amount of people doing missions (over 110k per day are completed and rising) and with the amount of new people starting and the PCU always on the rise, i think we need to get a new agent system in that will work better with a large online count. now we have the warp to 0 feature ingame, i can't see that this would be a problem tbh. this is just my view and not an offical "this is whats happening n00bs" statement Sharkbiat, I think you're underestimating the inginuity of pirates. Once any type of traffic becomes common in low sec pirate group will arrise with the capability to gank it. If you where able to move Motsu to low sec and if folks followed the agents there would be a brief blood bath/piracy spree followed by the abandonment of those agents. If you're considering moving agents to low sec tbh I would recommend that you get an alt in a low sec carebear corp for a month or so to get a feel for low sec before moving agents there. Remember level 4 missions require bigger ships, bigger ships can't align and warp before jump cloak breaks. This means that they can be locked and scrammed before warp which honestly I think is a large reason why people won't run missions in low sec (unless the price of gear where to decline so that top level mission runers weren't flying on average 2bil in ship + geat). Also how do you plan to stop "content ownership". Every 10/10 plex in the game is currently owned by a major alliance. How do you plan to avoid a similar situation in low sec with groups monoplozing agents. Somehow I don't think it's your intent that only major alliance members should get to use high level agents. Dal Originally by: CCP Sharkbait we are screwed. delaying startup again. soon as i have time i will fill you in on the details
Alex Tremayne Lyrus Associates	Posted - 2007.04.07 17:02:00 - [28] Originally by: CCP Sharkbait it is not something that is happening, it's just my view of something i would like to see done. That's a shame. Sure, there would be a lot of whining and you may lose some subscriptions, (though I don't think it would be anywhere near as many as the doomsayers might suggest) but it would have a hell of an effect on the population distribution around empire. I would dearly love to see this happen. That said, I was hoping you wouldn't cave to pressure on warp to zero and that you'd just delete everyone's instas. I was disappointed there too. Lyrus Associates' Diplomat Of Last Resort
Alex Tremayne Lyrus Associates	Posted - 2007.04.07 17:02:00 - [29] Originally by: CCP Sharkbait it is not something that is happening, it's just my view of something i would like to see done. That's a shame. Sure, there would be a lot of whining and you may lose some subscriptions, (though I don't think it would be anywhere near as many as the doomsayers might suggest) but it would have a hell of an effect on the population distribution around empire. I would dearly love to see this happen. That said, I was hoping you wouldn't cave to pressure on warp to zero and that you'd just delete everyone's instas. I was disappointed there too. Lyrus Associates' Diplomat Of Last Resort
Marquis Dean The Last Thing You'll Ever See	Posted - 2007.04.07 17:03:00 - [30] I think the corp-level LP pool is the best idea i've heard in ages. It would allow people to spread out of their own accord. And i'm not sure moving Lvl4s to losec is necessary, people will either just not run them, or they will go nuts on level 3s. And can you imagine the complaints on the forums? I know that shouldn't matter, but it will break world records. If the corp-level LP can be fasttracked, it would solve issues like the Santenpaa constellation almost overnight. --- Originally by: CCP Sharkbait will explain when i have the time i promise
Marquis Dean The Last Thing You'll Ever See	Posted - 2007.04.07 17:03:00 - [31] I think the corp-level LP pool is the best idea i've heard in ages. It would allow people to spread out of their own accord. And i'm not sure moving Lvl4s to losec is necessary, people will either just not run them, or they will go nuts on level 3s. And can you imagine the complaints on the forums? I know that shouldn't matter, but it will break world records. If the corp-level LP can be fasttracked, it would solve issues like the Santenpaa constellation almost overnight. --- Originally by: CCP Sharkbait will explain when i have the time i promise
Velsharoon Gallente Endgame.	Posted - 2007.04.07 17:15:00 - [32] Originally by: Dal Thrax Originally by: CCP Sharkbait i thing that worries me tbh is that the current agent system was not designed to handle the amount of people that it is having to. there is a change i would like to see but i think it would annoy too many people and will not happen. this is what i would like to see all lv5 agents put into 0.0 all lv4 agents moved to 0.0 and low sec. all lv3 agents moved to 0.2 - 0.6 sec systems. all lv2's and lv1's found in 0.6 and higher. the main reason i would like to see it happen is because i think the current system can't handle the amount of people doing missions (over 110k per day are completed and rising) and with the amount of new people starting and the PCU always on the rise, i think we need to get a new agent system in that will work better with a large online count. now we have the warp to 0 feature ingame, i can't see that this would be a problem tbh. this is just my view and not an offical "this is whats happening n00bs" statement Sharkbiat, I think you're underestimating the inginuity of pirates. Once any type of traffic becomes common in low sec pirate group will arrise with the capability to gank it. If you where able to move Motsu to low sec and if folks followed the agents there would be a brief blood bath/piracy spree followed by the abandonment of those agents. If you're considering moving agents to low sec tbh I would recommend that you get an alt in a low sec carebear corp for a month or so to get a feel for low sec before moving agents there. Remember level 4 missions require bigger ships, bigger ships can't align and warp before jump cloak breaks. This means that they can be locked and scrammed before warp which honestly I think is a large reason why people won't run missions in low sec (unless the price of gear where to decline so that top level mission runers weren't flying on average 2bil in ship + geat). Also how do you plan to stop "content ownership". Every 10/10 plex in the game is currently owned by a major alliance. How do you plan to avoid a similar situation in low sec with groups monoplozing agents. Somehow I don't think it's your intent that only major alliance members should get to use high level agents. Dal ONOES CAREBEARS FORCED TO INTERACT WITH OTHER PLAYERS SHOCK HORROR Now I totally get were your coming from, but if pirates can be smart and figure out how to kill carebears then damn well the carebears can sort themselves out (Namatz akin or whatever did this and im sure others have to)
Vincent Lionhart	Posted - 2007.04.07 17:27:00 - [33] I'm beginning to wonder if I should just move agents. From what the dev has said: nothing is going to be done about this for a while. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only player getting ****ed off about this... Time to find a new agent and forget my LP.
Becky Cynohooker	Posted - 2007.04.07 17:38:00 - [34] There are a few players in my corp that run with the Caldari Navy agents out of Motsu, and while they'd love to move, don't wish to loose all their LP's. If LP's moved to the corp as opposed to agent level, most of these players have stated that they'd move to less lagged, but lower quality agents. They just don't wish to throw away all the LP's they're already earned.
Jim McGregor	Posted - 2007.04.07 17:40:00 - [35] Edited by: Jim McGregor on 07/04/2007 17:37:05 Originally by: Vincent Lionhart I'm beginning to wonder if I should just move agents. From what the dev has said: nothing is going to be done about this for a while. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only player getting ****ed off about this... Time to find a new agent and forget my LP. Ive been telling people this from day one... I must be a genius. Staying around for years in the same system, hoping there will some day magically be no lag despite every new mission runner picking the exact same system... where do i NOT sign? --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune
Pardack State War Academy	Posted - 2007.04.07 17:42:00 - [36] Originally by: CCP Sharkbait i thing that worries me tbh is that the current agent system was not designed to handle the amount of people that it is having to. there is a change i would like to see but i think it would annoy too many people and will not happen. this is what i would like to see all lv5 agents put into 0.0 all lv4 agents moved to 0.0 and low sec. all lv3 agents moved to 0.2 - 0.6 sec systems. all lv2's and lv1's found in 0.6 and higher. the main reason i would like to see it happen is because i think the current system can't handle the amount of people doing missions (over 110k per day are completed and rising) and with the amount of new people starting and the PCU always on the rise, i think we need to get a new agent system in that will work better with a large online count. now we have the warp to 0 feature ingame, i can't see that this would be a problem tbh. this is just my view and not an offical "this is whats happening n00bs" statement I really don't like this as an answer. You're just moving the problem and 'defining' it away by putting missions in low-sec. Many people will not go for this change, including me. The thing that frustrates me the most is the 'justification' of moving many L3s and all L4s to low/no-sec space. You're just moving the problem to areas where people who run these missions DO NOT want to go, thus defining away the problem. Which is also the most simple way to be done with it. There are already agents in low-sec, how many people run them? Not too many compared to high-sec agents. Do you really think this is just a coincidence? Low-sec is underpopulated as it is and I can see the reasoning to move missions there to reduce load, I do not see it as a panacea. There are other ways to encourage people to go there, other than forcing them there. Sure, you'll 'distribute' the load more evenly by having people leave and less people to do them. Is that really the solution you want? There have been tons of suggestions on how to fix this, search and read the forums. The best one I can see is to simply add more agents to more diverse regions of space. There are TONS of high-sec constellations and systems out there, why force people into low/no-sec? Wouldn't adding agents and actually distributing many of the same quality agents more evenly around high-sec perform the same function? Mission running isn't the pew pew that some seem to believe EVE is ALL about. There are many aspects to the game and missions are a BIG part. Check your own numbers. 110k missions per day being done, isn't that a fairly large HINT that a lot of people like doing missions? They're short things that people with not a lot of time can do with the hour or two they get to play. Moving missions to low-sec doesn't encourage player interaction either. The mission runners who brave low-sec will still play the same as before. Again, just moving the problem. Sharky, I love ya. You give great info about what's happening in EVE when things go wrong. I think you need to re-evaluate your stance and consider the 'carebear' point of view and see how the changes effect them. Yeah I've done the alliance, 0.0, pew-pew, lagging fleet battle, POS war, station ping-pong thing and it's just not my playstyle. I like eve because of the 'sandbox' mentality. You make the game what it is. Artifically forcing people into holes, ruins this and would reduce my proclivity to play. Sure mission running in low/no-sec can be done, but I despise 'looking over my shoulder' every 5 seconds to make sure I'm not being attacked. A little more creative thinking other than PVP, PVP, PVP would be a refreshing change.
Pardack State War Academy	Posted - 2007.04.07 17:46:00 - [37] Originally by: Vincent Lionhart I'm beginning to wonder if I should just move agents. From what the dev has said: nothing is going to be done about this for a while. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only player getting ****ed off about this... Time to find a new agent and forget my LP. I did the same thing recently, moved to a new agent out of the Saila/Motsu area as I had worse lag there than in Jita with 4x as many people. The lag is much better but the LPs I left behind stinks.
Lord Dynastron Mystical Knights Legionnaire Services Ltd.	Posted - 2007.04.07 17:46:00 - [38] Hehe,, poor Sharky,,, how do all those words taste that people are sticking into your mouth?!

CCP Sharkbait	Posted - 2007.04.07 17:49:00 - [39] Originally by: Vincent Lionhart I'm beginning to wonder if I should just move agents. From what the dev has said: nothing is going to be done about this for a while. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only player getting **ed off about this... Time to find a new agent and forget my LP. it's something we are working on and i want to try and get some things done for the revelations 2 patch. Originally by:** Pardack Originally by: CCP Sharkbait i thing that worries me tbh is that the current agent system was not designed to handle the amount of people that it is having to. there is a change i would like to see but i think it would annoy too many people and will not happen. this is what i would like to see all lv5 agents put into 0.0 all lv4 agents moved to 0.0 and low sec. all lv3 agents moved to 0.2 - 0.6 sec systems. all lv2's and lv1's found in 0.6 and higher. the main reason i would like to see it happen is because i think the current system can't handle the amount of people doing missions (over 110k per day are completed and rising) and with the amount of new people starting and the PCU always on the rise, i think we need to get a new agent system in that will work better with a large online count. now we have the warp to 0 feature ingame, i can't see that this would be a problem tbh. this is just my view and not an offical "this is whats happening n00bs" statement I really don't like this as an answer. You're just moving the problem and 'defining' it away by putting missions in low-sec. Many people will not go for this change, including me. it's not happening, who said it was ? i said it's something i would like to see. this is a discussion board and i'm allowed an opinion

Jim McGregor	Posted - 2007.04.07 17:53:00 - [40] Come on sharky, we all know you have this pink divine rod you wave around the office and everyone does what you say... And.. please dont interpret pink rod as anything other than a, umm, pink rod... --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune
Vincent Lionhart	Posted - 2007.04.07 17:53:00 - [41] I'm pretty sure the devs won't be that stupid. They realize that a large portion of the people who play this game are carebears...or at least have some carebear in them. I've been to 0.0, but if I had to make isk by ONLY being in 0.0 I'd quit this game because then I might as well go play Lineage 2.

CCP Sharkbait	Posted - 2007.04.07 17:56:00 - [42] i bet if i said i wanted to jump off a cliff none of you would try to stop me. move a few agents, well.....................

Alex Tremayne Lyrus Associates	Posted - 2007.04.07 17:57:00 - [43] Originally by: CCP Sharkbait Originally by: Pardack Originally by: CCP Sharkbait Really good idea for sorting out agent problems I really don't like this as an answer. You're just moving the problem and 'defining' it away by putting missions in low-sec. Many people will not go for this change, including me. it's not happening, who said it was ? i said it's something i would like to see. this is a discussion board and i'm allowed an opinion Apparently not. Even when you're right. Go on, make the changes just to spite them now. You know it makes sense. Lyrus Associates' Diplomat Of Last Resort
Pardack State War Academy	Posted - 2007.04.07 18:01:00 - [44] Edited by: Pardack on 07/04/2007 18:02:26 Edited by: Pardack on 07/04/2007 18:00:17 Originally by: CCP Sharkbait Originally by: Vincent Lionhart I'm beginning to wonder if I should just move agents. From what the dev has said: nothing is going to be done about this for a while. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only player getting **ed off about this... Time to find a new agent and forget my LP. it's something we are working on and i want to try and get some things done for the revelations 2 patch. Originally by:** Pardack Originally by: CCP Sharkbait i thing that worries me tbh is that the current agent system was not designed to handle the amount of people that it is having to. there is a change i would like to see but i think it would annoy too many people and will not happen. this is what i would like to see all lv5 agents put into 0.0 all lv4 agents moved to 0.0 and low sec. all lv3 agents moved to 0.2 - 0.6 sec systems. all lv2's and lv1's found in 0.6 and higher. the main reason i would like to see it happen is because i think the current system can't handle the amount of people doing missions (over 110k per day are completed and rising) and with the amount of new people starting and the PCU always on the rise, i think we need to get a new agent system in that will work better with a large online count. now we have the warp to 0 feature ingame, i can't see that this would be a problem tbh. this is just my view and not an offical "this is whats happening n00bs" statement I really don't like this as an answer. You're just moving the problem and 'defining' it away by putting missions in low-sec. Many people will not go for this change, including me. it's not happening, who said it was ? i said it's something i would like to see. this is a discussion board and i'm allowed an opinion It IS a discussion. I never said it was happening. I'm responding to your statements . The fact that you have this position is what bugs me. How do you see this as a change for the better for those who don't prefer pvp? Also, since you're a member of the dev team your opinion has a lot more weight in meetings and discussions than players. We're not there. So your opinion impacts all those who don't agree with you. I'm putting out the argument and reasons why I don't think this should happen. Learn to take a little criticism and banter before rolling your eyes. Which is again, the easy way out rather than addressing the issue. *edit Please don't jump off a cliff :) I like ya too much. Stay cool

CCP Sharkbait	Posted - 2007.04.07 18:06:00 - [45] hehe just for the record i aviod meetings at all costs. they bore me to tears. i found a great way of getting out of them, but i have kept and will keep this a secret for as long as possible.

Jim McGregor	Posted - 2007.04.07 18:08:00 - [46] Originally by: CCP Sharkbait hehe just for the record i aviod meetings at all costs. they bore me to tears. i found a great way of getting out of them, but i have kept and will keep this a secret for as long as possible. Alienate everyone around you? Yeah I use that too. --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune
Lord Dynastron Mystical Knights Legionnaire Services Ltd.	Posted - 2007.04.07 18:10:00 - [47] Originally by: CCP Sharkbait hehe just for the record i aviod meetings at all costs. they bore me to tears. i found a great way of getting out of them, but i have kept and will keep this a secret for as long as possible. You mean like working until after 6pm on a saturday so you have to come in late monday,, narrowly missing the 10am meeting!? ...which makes me wonder,,, why are you working late on a Saturday!? Yuck
Pardack State War Academy	Posted - 2007.04.07 18:11:00 - [48] Edited by: Pardack on 07/04/2007 18:09:04 Originally by: CCP Sharkbait hehe just for the record i aviod meetings at all costs. they bore me to tears. i found a great way of getting out of them, but i have kept and will keep this a secret for as long as possible. You're just trying to get on my good side :) I HATE meeings, with a passion, ugh. A meeting once in a while is OK. Meetings to talk about past meetings and future meetings and having meetings about meetings... Meetings are the bane of programatic existence. * License plate "I'd rather be programming" Also, you don't have to publicly announce your secret, you can e-mail it to me :) I bet it has something to do with passing gas :)
qrac Caldari Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.04.07 18:17:00 - [49] Edited by: qrac on 07/04/2007 18:13:50 Originally by: CCP Sharkbait the main reason i would like to see it happen is because i think the current system can't handle the amount of people doing missions (over 110k per day are completed and rising) and with the amount of new people starting and the PCU always on the rise, i think we need to get a new agent system in that will work better with a large online count. now we have the warp to 0 feature ingame, i can't see that this would be a problem tbh. this is just my view and not an offical "this is whats happening n00bs" statement Most missions nowadays are deadspace missions. Why not move the deadspace area to a separate node? The only reason against this would be that the session changes cost is greater than the cost saved by relocating the mission to another node. This should be pretty easy to implement since you can't warp straight to the mission but need to use a gate. -------------------------------------------
Lord Dynastron Mystical Knights Legionnaire Services Ltd.	Posted - 2007.04.07 18:19:00 - [50] Originally by: qrac Edited by: qrac on 07/04/2007 18:13:50 Originally by: CCP Sharkbait the main reason i would like to see it happen is because i think the current system can't handle the amount of people doing missions (over 110k per day are completed and rising) and with the amount of new people starting and the PCU always on the rise, i think we need to get a new agent system in that will work better with a large online count. now we have the warp to 0 feature ingame, i can't see that this would be a problem tbh. this is just my view and not an offical "this is whats happening n00bs" statement Most missions nowadays are deadspace missions. Why not move the deadspace area to a separate node? The only reason against this would be that the session changes cost is greater than the cost saved by relocating the mission to another node. This should be pretty easy to implement since you can't warp straight to the mission but need to use a gate. Hmm,, good idea,, but I suspect that is already what is happening.
Pardack State War Academy	Posted - 2007.04.07 18:33:00 - [51] Edited by: Pardack on 07/04/2007 18:31:26 Originally by: Lord Dynastron Originally by: qrac Edited by: qrac on 07/04/2007 18:13:50 Originally by: CCP Sharkbait the main reason i would like to see it happen is because i think the current system can't handle the amount of people doing missions (over 110k per day are completed and rising) and with the amount of new people starting and the PCU always on the rise, i think we need to get a new agent system in that will work better with a large online count. now we have the warp to 0 feature ingame, i can't see that this would be a problem tbh. this is just my view and not an offical "this is whats happening n00bs" statement Most missions nowadays are deadspace missions. Why not move the deadspace area to a separate node? The only reason against this would be that the session changes cost is greater than the cost saved by relocating the mission to another node. This should be pretty easy to implement since you can't warp straight to the mission but need to use a gate. Hmm,, good idea,, but I suspect that is already what is happening. AFAIK, each system is attached to a node (along with other systems). So I disagree with you. This is also the bottleneck in the node-balancing system, it cannot dynamically predict large numbers of people engaging in a sytem (deadspace or not). Eg. Systems A, B, C, D, E, F and G are tied to one processor. If any of those systems have large numbers of people, all the rest lag. Since load-balancing happens after down-time, systems reflect the lag of the previous average load for the past week and not the current load, that is THE major problem with no easy solution.

CCP Sharkbait	Posted - 2007.04.07 18:44:00 - [52] Originally by: qrac Edited by: qrac on 07/04/2007 18:13:50 Originally by: CCP Sharkbait the main reason i would like to see it happen is because i think the current system can't handle the amount of people doing missions (over 110k per day are completed and rising) and with the amount of new people starting and the PCU always on the rise, i think we need to get a new agent system in that will work better with a large online count. now we have the warp to 0 feature ingame, i can't see that this would be a problem tbh. this is just my view and not an offical "this is whats happening n00bs" statement Most missions nowadays are deadspace missions. Why not move the deadspace area to a separate node? The only reason against this would be that the session changes cost is greater than the cost saved by relocating the mission to another node. This should be pretty easy to implement since you can't warp straight to the mission but need to use a gate. this is a good idea and has been talked about before now and is still an option. at the moment we can only have a system loaded on 1 node, but this is being looked into and if we can get around that then we maybe move the missions to another node within the same system. maybe even have slave nodes for nodes. it's another thing that is being looked into.

Little Benjamin Natural Inventions	Posted - 2007.04.07 18:51:00 - [53] What interests me is, if there is an overall approach for a redesign server-side so that any concentration of pilots (hubs, large engagements, ...) could be handled fluently? \benjamin
Ralara Caldari Lilandri Foundation	Posted - 2007.04.07 18:55:00 - [54] Originally by: CCP Sharkbait they did have a big impact, altho you can't see it so clearly, we can. so effectively, your new strategies havent actually solved the situation for the players? A few numbers on your spreadsheet have changed, but for us, the lag is still just about the same as normal, eh? Is that what you just said? That what you did, had a "big impact" but the players "can't see it" - as in, we still have the lag? In that case: Fail. I'm a corp thief. And remember, I only do it because I like your robot.
Pardack State War Academy	Posted - 2007.04.07 18:57:00 - [55] Originally by: SharkBait this is a good idea and has been talked about before now and is still an option. at the moment we can only have a system loaded on 1 node, but this is being looked into and if we can get around that then we maybe move the missions to another node within the same system. maybe even have slave nodes for nodes. it's another thing that is being looked into. This would be a HUGE advantage. Currently lag is caused by many people doing many thing in one node. Dynamically assigning nodes to systems (preferably multiple nodes/system) would be ace. IMO that's the biggest (and HARDEST thing to do programatically) thing that CCP can do to alleviate lag. Daily re-balancing does help lag overall by looking at trends. Trends, however, do not reflect actual game-time scenarios where hundreds of people swarm an area. This causes ALL systems on that node to lag. Dynamically allocating CPU usage is a VERY tricky thing to achieve, requiring a lot of programming resources and even then there's no guarantee it will work as expected.
Pardack State War Academy	Posted - 2007.04.07 19:07:00 - [56] Edited by: Pardack on 07/04/2007 19:05:22 Originally by: Ralara Originally by: CCP Sharkbait they did have a big impact, altho you can't see it so clearly, we can. so effectively, your new strategies havent actually solved the situation for the players? A few numbers on your spreadsheet have changed, but for us, the lag is still just about the same as normal, eh? Is that what you just said? That what you did, had a "big impact" but the players "can't see it" - as in, we still have the lag? In that case: Fail. I couldn't agree more. Numbers are one thing. The actual experience is a whole other beast. Sure the servers may be running 10% more efficiently (which is good) but if players still experience the same amount of lag, has anything actually been accomplished other than touting numbers? Example: Our company recently re-designed the software engine of our primary product. The result was more efficiency 'behind the scene', but the user experience was no different. The 'user experience' is what really matters. So what if the servers are running faster if no-one notices? I absolutely agree that these lower level changes need to be made, but from the user perspective if nothing has changed, who cares? The user needs to see changes. Server-side changes are good. Everything runs more efficiently, but if users don't see the change, was there really that much effect other than your numbers looking better?
qrac Caldari Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.04.07 19:10:00 - [57] Edited by: qrac on 07/04/2007 19:11:26 Originally by: CCP Sharkbait this is a good idea and has been talked about before now and is still an option. at the moment we can only have a system loaded on 1 node, but this is being looked into and if we can get around that then we maybe move the missions to another node within the same system. maybe even have slave nodes for nodes. it's another thing that is being looked into. What kind of complications are we looking at? Can two nodes share the same market or is the market tied to a node? The "local" chat should be shareable between nodes. Scanning could be solved by making the outside world invisible from inside the deadspace pocket and vice versa (except for the gate into it). I'm guessing that some (probably a lot) of code which depends on the node (maybe like "Assets in current system") needs changing and is only a shortterm solution. Slavenodes and several nodes within a system would be preferable. Btw is this something you have started working on or is it still in planning? It's kind of hard to make any suggestions without knowing the architecture of the nodes and systems. -------------------------------------------
Sgt Napalm Synergy Evolved Sparta Alliance	Posted - 2007.04.07 19:11:00 - [58] Sharkbait ftw --- Sahwoolo Etoophie, next time I'll activate the module! ;) O rly? ;) -Sahwoolo
Pardack State War Academy	Posted - 2007.04.07 19:13:00 - [59] Originally by: Sgt Napalm Sharkbait ftw riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. LOL.

CCP Sharkbait	Posted - 2007.04.07 19:22:00 - [60] Originally by: Ralara Edited by: Ralara on 07/04/2007 18:55:17 Originally by: CCP Sharkbait they did have a big impact, altho you can't see it so clearly, we can. so effectively, your new strategies havent actually solved the situation for the players? A few numbers on your spreadsheet have changed, but for us, the lag is still just about the same as normal, eh? Is that what you just said? That what you did, had a "big impact" but the players "can't see it" - as in, we still have the lag? In that case: Fail. To put it bluntly. I know, I know, it's not easy. If you had a quick and easy fix you'd have done it a year ago. Random idea: set a timer on missions: do a mission for an agent, you cant do another for 4 hours (like the decline option). You have to find another agent in the corp. That way, people don't stay in one hub. ? it's not about the numbers as such really. alot of people who used to pass through jita don't have to anymore and are using the new route. i'm sure they are noticing it. also although jita is still high load, before the changes it was always at 100% cpu. now it doesn't rest at 100% cpu, quite offen it is only at 80-90%. i just checked and we are in peak hour and jita is only at 92% cpu. thats alot better than it was tbh. Originally by: qrac Edited by: qrac on 07/04/2007 19:11:26 Originally by: CCP Sharkbait this is a good idea and has been talked about before now and is still an option. at the moment we can only have a system loaded on 1 node, but this is being looked into and if we can get around that then we maybe move the missions to another node within the same system. maybe even have slave nodes for nodes. it's another thing that is being looked into. What kind of complications are we looking at? Can two nodes share the same market or is the market tied to a node? The "local" chat should be shareable between nodes. Scanning could be solved by making the outside world invisible from inside the deadspace pocket and vice versa (except for the gate into it). I'm guessing that some (probably a lot) of code which depends on the node (maybe like "Assets in current system") needs changing and is only a shortterm solution. Slavenodes and several nodes within a system would be preferable. Btw is this something you have started working on or is it still in planning? It's kind of hard to make any suggestions without knowing the architecture of the nodes and systems. in testing, when we have the same system loaded on 2 nodes it goes completely bonkers. causes massive lag as people are trying to do things on 2 nodes, causes massive serverside memory leaks and causes clients to disconnect alot. the market regions are run on different nodes and they don't lag really. there are 4 market nodes (2 machines) and they are only at about 10% cpu. so thats not the problem really. chat channels i think are handled by the proxies and are kinda connected to everything as in theroy there could be a person on every node in the same chat channel.

Ralara Caldari Lilandri Foundation	Posted - 2007.04.07 19:34:00 - [61] Originally by: CCP Sharkbait it's not about the numbers as such really. alot of people who used to pass through jita don't have to anymore and are using the new route. i'm sure they are noticing it. also although jita is still high load, before the changes it was always at 100% cpu. now it doesn't rest at 100% cpu, quite offen it is only at 80-90%. i just checked and we are in peak hour and jita is only at 92% cpu. thats alot better than it was tbh. Well "tbh", I was in Jita yesterday and had to file a stuck petition since I couldnt undock without the black screen in the way for over 10 minutes. So no, we're not noticing it. Look, I don't mean to say you're rubbish. You're not making it lag on purpose and as I say, I'm sure if you knew of an easy way, then you'd implement it without hesitation. o The problem with the Jita area is it's too "easy" to get too - too many jump points into it. o The station faces the wrong way for some of the jump gates - turn it (or move it - 4-4 this is) so that it faces all jumpgates on undock, so we dont have to reverse into the station and bump. o Motsu and Saila - both massive mission hubs - are right next door - move these agents away from Jita. It's too easy to make 2 or 3 jumps and sell your stuff in Jita. Spread them out a bit (but keep them away from Torrinos!! ;) ) o Add some more Q18 agents (or other high quality agents) to the surrounding areas - also add a few for the other races, so to keep things balanced. It cna't be that hard. A big popup saying "you don't actually have to run missions for XXX Navy to get a Navy YYY ship, by the way!" notice would help! Nearly everyone there is there because: 1) They think think that the Navy is the only way to get a CNR. 2) They've realised it isn't but have got so many LP there, that they can't move (peopel with 300, 400k LP). Now I know Rev 2.0 is coming up with this "shop" thing for agents, but for the love of god, make it FACTION wide, not corp wide, so these people can spread out to other corporations and maintain their LP. Else people will just stay there in Motsu, Saila and then sell things in Jita. You know it. I know it. Everyone on the forums knows it. The players know it. Why not just change it? Who's going to complain?? There is no downside. Lag goes down, population spreads out, missionrunners use other corps... what is the downside?? I'm a corp thief. And remember, I only do it because I like your robot.
Pardack State War Academy	Posted - 2007.04.07 19:36:00 - [62] Originally by: CCP Sharkbait Originally by: Ralara Edited by: Ralara on 07/04/2007 18:55:17 Originally by: CCP Sharkbait they did have a big impact, altho you can't see it so clearly, we can. so effectively, your new strategies havent actually solved the situation for the players? A few numbers on your spreadsheet have changed, but for us, the lag is still just about the same as normal, eh? Is that what you just said? That what you did, had a "big impact" but the players "can't see it" - as in, we still have the lag? In that case: Fail. To put it bluntly. I know, I know, it's not easy. If you had a quick and easy fix you'd have done it a year ago. Random idea: set a timer on missions: do a mission for an agent, you cant do another for 4 hours (like the decline option). You have to find another agent in the corp. That way, people don't stay in one hub. ? it's not about the numbers as such really. alot of people who used to pass through jita don't have to anymore and are using the new route. i'm sure they are noticing it. also although jita is still high load, before the changes it was always at 100% cpu. now it doesn't rest at 100% cpu, quite offen it is only at 80-90%. i just checked and we are in peak hour and jita is only at 92% cpu. thats alot better than it was tbh. Originally by: qrac Edited by: qrac on 07/04/2007 19:11:26 Originally by: CCP Sharkbait this is a good idea and has been talked about before now and is still an option. at the moment we can only have a system loaded on 1 node, but this is being looked into and if we can get around that then we maybe move the missions to another node within the same system. maybe even have slave nodes for nodes. it's another thing that is being looked into. What kind of complications are we looking at? Can two nodes share the same market or is the market tied to a node? The "local" chat should be shareable between nodes. Scanning could be solved by making the outside world invisible from inside the deadspace pocket and vice versa (except for the gate into it). I'm guessing that some (probably a lot) of code which depends on the node (maybe like "Assets in current system") needs changing and is only a shortterm solution. Slavenodes and several nodes within a system would be preferable. Btw is this something you have started working on or is it still in planning? It's kind of hard to make any suggestions without knowing the architecture of the nodes and systems. in testing, when we have the same system loaded on 2 nodes it goes completely bonkers. causes massive lag as people are trying to do things on 2 nodes, causes massive serverside memory leaks and causes clients to disconnect alot. the market regions are run on different nodes and they don't lag really. there are 4 market nodes (2 machines) and they are only at about 10% cpu. so thats not the problem really. chat channels i think are handled by the proxies and are kinda connected to everything as in theroy there could be a person on every node in the same chat channel. Please don't give up on this. As I've said, it's not an easy task to do, but in the long run I firmly belive this approach (not only two CPUs per system, but multiple if needed) is the long term solution. There are so many unused and/or under-used sytems out there. They CPU time is literally being wasted. Dynamically allocating CPUs to where it is needed is the crux IMO. If that can be technically sorted, I see a much brighter future for EVE. Currently, you may as well be running BOINC on the cluster, as a majority of it is sitting there really doing nothing most of the time.
Frug Zenithal Harvest	Posted - 2007.04.07 19:37:00 - [63] Originally by: CCP Sharkbait i bet if i said i wanted to jump off a cliff none of you would try to stop me. move a few agents, well..................... Don't say that. You're awesome and we need you. I always liked the idea of dynamic agent quality. Agents who get used too much start paying less, and the agents in the middle of nowhere are desperate to have their missions done and offer better rewards. - - - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - - - "We need to invent a new Clue Super Weapon... Something that distributes clue on a never before seen level." -Cpt Psycho
qrac Caldari Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.04.07 19:57:00 - [64] Originally by: CCP Sharkbait in testing, when we have the same system loaded on 2 nodes it goes completely bonkers. causes massive lag as people are trying to do things on 2 nodes, causes massive serverside memory leaks and causes clients to disconnect alot. So no cloning the system and running it on 2 nodes, synching them and then making a handover I was thinking more of treating a deadspace pocket like a new system on another node but with market access etc to the "real" system. In worst case you could probably implement it fairly quickly by treating it as an entire different system by removing the system dependant services. All you would have then is "empty" (except for the deadspace pocket) cloned systems running on dedicated mission nodes. -------------------------------------------
qrac Caldari Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.04.07 19:59:00 - [65] Originally by: Frug I always liked the idea of dynamic agent quality. Agents who get used too much start paying less, and the agents in the middle of nowhere are desperate to have their missions done and offer better rewards. It used to be like that, in the sense that agents only handed out a certain number of missions between downtimes. -------------------------------------------
Par'Gellen Gallente Low Grade Ore	Posted - 2007.04.07 20:04:00 - [66] Edited by: Par''Gellen on 07/04/2007 20:01:11 Simple fix: Get rid of agent quality levels and re-distribute agents by level/division evenly across the entire universe map. People might be annoyed but they'll get over it. End of problem. Someone in authority needs to slam a hand down on the meeting table and yell "Just get it bloody done!". --- CCP : Save my mousewheel!
Pardack State War Academy	Posted - 2007.04.07 20:06:00 - [67] Originally by: CCP Sharkbait in testing, when we have the same system loaded on 2 nodes it goes completely bonkers. causes massive lag as people are trying to do things on 2 nodes, causes massive serverside memory leaks and causes clients to disconnect alot. Memory leaks can be a pain but they are definately traceable. It will take 'some' (as in a LOT) of time to fix but it is a very doable job. Is the lag caused by the memory leaks or from sheer server processing or something else that you don't know?
Barbarellas Daughter Lonely Barbarella	Posted - 2007.04.07 20:07:00 - [68] Originally by: qrac Originally by: CCP Sharkbait in testing, when we have the same system loaded on 2 nodes it goes completely bonkers. causes massive lag as people are trying to do things on 2 nodes, causes massive serverside memory leaks and causes clients to disconnect alot. So no cloning the system and running it on 2 nodes, synching them and then making a handover I was thinking more of treating a deadspace pocket like a new system on another node but with market access etc to the "real" system. In worst case you could probably implement it fairly quickly by treating it as an entire different system by removing the system dependant services. All you would have then is "empty" (except for the deadspace pocket) cloned systems running on dedicated mission nodes. Yeah, just show messages like: You cannot connect to market/assets/bookmarks/etc while being in a deadspace.
DeadRow Magnificent Beavers Exquisite Malevolence	Posted - 2007.04.07 20:12:00 - [69] Get rid of Agent Quality and have set value for each level; 2 = 3.00 Standings, 3 = 4.00 Standings, 4 = 7.00 Standings (basically the standings needed for top Quality atm). Means that players aren't tied to one system to get the most lp/mission they cam. Thats my opinion anyways. /DeadRow snip - signature removed, please email us with a link if you wish to know why. -Ivan K
Pardack State War Academy	Posted - 2007.04.07 20:24:00 - [70] Originally by: DeadRow Get rid of Agent Quality and have set value for each level; 2 = 3.00 Standings, 3 = 4.00 Standings, 4 = 7.00 Standings (basically the standings needed for top Quality atm). Means that players aren't tied to one system to get the most lp/mission they cam. Thats my opinion anyways. That's a good idea. Higher level agents should IMO give higher rewards (which they usually do) than lower level, higher standings would be a plus. The problem this doesn't solve is that LPs currently are still tied to a specific agent. So once you start running missions for one, you're tied to that agent if you want to spend your LPs. Maybe removing agent quality, spreading them out over more space AND allowing for Corp/Faction offers instead of specific agent offers or an 'LP Store' where you can trade in your LPs for 'stuff' would be some good ideas to 'spread things out' more.
Par'Gellen Gallente Low Grade Ore	Posted - 2007.04.07 21:00:00 - [71] Originally by: Pardack Maybe removing agent quality, spreading them out over more space AND allowing for Corp/Faction offers instead of specific agent offers or an 'LP Store' where you can trade in your LPs for 'stuff' would be some good ideas to 'spread things out' more. Well they already said the LP Store thing was going to happen so I take that as a given. --- CCP : Save my mousewheel!
Pardack State War Academy	Posted - 2007.04.07 21:13:00 - [72] Edited by: Pardack on 07/04/2007 21:13:54 Originally by: Par'Gellen Originally by: Pardack Maybe removing agent quality, spreading them out over more space AND allowing for Corp/Faction offers instead of specific agent offers or an 'LP Store' where you can trade in your LPs for 'stuff' would be some good ideas to 'spread things out' more. Well they already said the LP Store thing was going to happen so I take that as a given. CCP has said a lot in the past Invariably things get pushed back and back-seated for an indefinate period of time. I've no doubt that the 'LP Store' will eventually happen. WHEN it will happen is a whole other story. IIRC, Revelations was to be ONE patch. Then after time, it was divided up into Rev1, Rev2, Rev3 etc.
Frug Zenithal Harvest	Posted - 2007.04.07 21:35:00 - [73] That's got little to do with CCP specifically. If you follow software development much (particularly game release dates) you know that's normal. - - - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - - - "We need to invent a new Clue Super Weapon... Something that distributes clue on a never before seen level." -Cpt Psycho
Pardack State War Academy	Posted - 2007.04.07 21:50:00 - [74] Originally by: Frug That's got little to do with CCP specifically. If you follow software development much (particularly game release dates) you know that's normal. I'm aware. As I stated it's not really IF it's going to happen, but WHEN. The Saila/Motsu lag problem has been around for months with no appreciable change. Even with the latest 'need for speed' patch, no difference is noticed. It all gets back to what the user experiences, not about the numbers on the server (though they are very useful). If the cluster is running 20% more efficiently than before yet people in the Saila/Motsu area suffer the same lag, that indicates a more systematic problem (as is the case). Overall the cluster is running better, but there are still pockets of space (empire, low-sec and 0.0) that constantly have lag. Whether it's player actions, server performance or something else, the player still experiences the same lag. That's the main sticking point, the user experience.
Pooka Caldari United Space Aillance USA	Posted - 2007.04.07 22:19:00 - [75] Edited by: Pooka on 07/04/2007 22:26:05 Originally by: CCP Sharkbait all lv5 agents put into 0.0 all lv4 agents moved to 0.0 and low sec. all lv3 agents moved to 0.2 - 0.6 sec systems. all lv2's and lv1's found in 0.6 and higher. OK putting on Nomex flame suit. Fact (IMHO): Most pepole are in over crowded Empire space Fact (IMHO): LOTs of players are solo players and don't have time to do much more then run missions along with a little mining. So move lvl 3 agents to 0.4 to 0.6 space ALONG WITH Concord. Pepole move, lagg reduces every one happy. Piratz should be happy because this groups them up tigher so they can kill each other. PROMISES MADE PROMISES KEPT Word: p·ca (POO-kuh) [pu:k@] Meaning: p·ca = goblin, sp
Gone'Postal Minmatar LuthorCorp Combat Division	Posted - 2007.04.07 22:42:00 - [76] Been said before but why not just make LP corp wide, Not the players corp, mission agents. Mission runners could then run ANY mission from any agent from the same corp and still have one pool of LP. the only bonus would be higher the mission level the more salvage,loot ect ect. or find an agent and when asking for a mission have the agent ask what level mission the player wants to run ? mission runners then won't need teh same agent, they would just need AN agent to run missions. Originally by: Dark Shikari Anyone comparing CCP to a glacier is really not being fair to the glacier. Tripping The Rift Since 2005
Akita T Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2007.04.08 11:53:00 - [77] Well, for starters, from a RP perspective, agent hubs MIGHT have some logical value, but from a gameplay perspective, there really shouldn't be more than ONE L4 agent per corp per system, and preferably not even more than one L4 "kill-mainly" type of agent in a system and immediate neighbours, regardless of corp/faction. What DOES make sense however, is having a L1, L2, L3 and a L4 "kill" agent for the same corp in the same system or at most 1 jump away. That being said, it's not the "Motsu/Saila region triangle", it's actually the "Aramachi/Motsu/Saila/Laah rhombus" that's being affected. First off, the C.N. Aramachi agent is better for all intents and purposes as the main Motsu agent, at least for people with decent social skills. Second, missions are ALMOST always assigned in the "rhombus", so no wonder you have all four systems heavily affected by lag. Would it be SUCH a crime to move away 2,3 or even 4 jumps in differet directions the Saila/Motsu agents ? I mean, the Aramachi one, you'd have to move it pretty far away in another 0.5 system, but systems with same sec as Saila/Motsu abound in the vicinity, andthey're not nearly as populated. _ MySkills \| Module/Rig stacknerfing explained
Dukath Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.04.08 12:23:00 - [78] Originally by: CCP Sharkbait jita - agent and market hub motsu - agent hub saila - agent hub we are looking into more changes, but at the moment there is nothing that can be done. the load/lag is causes by the amount of people trading or doing missions in the system and every play has the same right to be there as anyone else. the only way to clear the lag from the systems at the moment is to move the agents away from them. if we do that then we are just movingthe load to another system. there is alot of effort, both in code and worldshaping (balancing the map) to sort these systems out. we made changes for revelations 1.3 and they did have a big impact, altho you can't see it so clearly, we can. basically all i can suggest for the time being is to avoid the systems. Sharbait, i'm frankly appalled that this has not been solved yet when the solution is so mindboggling simple. Agent has a quality, representing the gain you get from doing missions for him. Just make an agent like an asteroid. Do a mission, quality of the agent drops, every x hours the quality of the agent goes up a bit. This is so bloody simple and will make sure agent missions are spread out all over the galaxy. Any popular agent will very quickly drop to -20 quality while out of the way places will have top quality agents. This simply change will automatically spread the load over a large amount of systems. Maybe not a full spread but at least good enough not to strain a single system anymore. Jita is too much of a market place? Start by having market slots. A sell order moves the goods to the hanger of the station, that hanger can store max 10million m3. Enough sell orders and the market won't accept new ones. This will not only force redistribution but also add some none violent pvp to the game.
Decairn Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2007.04.08 12:48:00 - [79] Remove agent quality, make LP and the level usable by a player based on standings and the system security level the mission is given from. Suddenly there is no reason to swamp a single system. Provide more cross-corporation missions within a race faction. Give people a reason to not concentrate on a single corporation type. --Decairn
ErazorHead FrenchWing's War Academy	Posted - 2007.04.08 13:45:00 - [80] Edited by: ErazorHead on 08/04/2007 13:45:14 Originally by: Ralara Originally by: CCP Sharkbait stuff. ...lots of stuff... You know it. I know it. Everyone on the forums knows it. The players know it. Why not just change it? Who's going to complain?? There is no downside. Lag goes down, population spreads out, missionrunners use other corps... what is the downside?? I agree that would help. Sharkbait, does CCP heard about Bigworld Technology ? Maybe you guys should take a look at this company and their technical solutions concerning nods overloads. To give a comprehensive image of this technology, imagine the game is like a giant spider web where players are spread into cells, cells beings servers. When there is too many players in one cell, the system detect it and dynamically rescale the spider web over the area where there is an overload, spreading the charge over multiple cells. As they claim, its totally transparent for the players they don't even notice they are instantly taken in charge by a different server. And yes it's Python (language in which EvE is coded) compatible. If it works as well as it seem to be, this is the ultimate solution for missions hubs, markets hubs and fleet battles. (edit:) well at least the lag wouldnt be server sided. I would be glad if you could take a look at it. (and no I don't have stock options in this company, Im just trying to help. hell I even encourage you to copy the technology with your own tools ! lol)
Rab	Posted - 2007.04.08 14:42:00 - [81] If CCP really have to admit their system can not cope with more than x people at one time using agents in the same region, system or node (50, 200, or 500, whatever it is) Then they have 2 choices: 1. Distribute numbers based on actual usage so that if theres 5000 people wanting to use the agent types in that node then you stick 5000/x agents available across different regions, nodes or systems of equivalent quality. Adjustment every 3-6 months according to actual data maybe? If caldari really do get 50% of the mission runners then give them 50% of the agents. They arent going to swap to minmatar, evidently. 2. Try and bully those or all mission runners into doing something else other than missions (for myriad reasons ranging from 'isk faucet' to 'they are anti-social' to 'its not how the game was intended', or any other spurious reason not to like them, choose whatever reason for getting in someone elses game here*) Most the low sec options involve the latter, Force risk, force pvp, force force force those carebears to change. If the problem is that 0.0 is enormously empty and empire is full, smart money says you should get your sec status paintbrush out and repaint a few of those red dots useful colours. If however, CCP want to state categorically that mission running is not what they intended from their game and its ruining their vision of pvp space utopia, then please just say it, and let the swarms of people that enjoy missions only to find another game and enjoy your smaller profit but artistically more ideal universe. Or you can find a happy medium whereby you can accept that the subscriptions from mission runners actually pay for other benefits like more staff and more servers and that mission runners pay for their space as much as anyone else. If someone chooses to spend that subscription mission running then they have as much right to mission space as a pvper has to pvp space. (albeit fleet battles are the same problem in reverse, to perhaps a more extreme level as 5000v5000 fleets will be here sometime the moment servers allow 4000v4000 battles.) Accommodate mission runners properly or tell them to walk the walk. cramming them into 25% of space and squeezing isn't working. - In an infinite universe, everything is definite. -
DeadRow Magnificent Beavers Exquisite Malevolence	Posted - 2007.04.08 15:43:00 - [82] Originally by: Pardack The problem this doesn't solve is that LPs currently are still tied to a specific agent. So once you start running missions for one, you're tied to that agent if you want to spend your LPs. They have stated they are gonna move the LP to store based, corporation wide system. Which would sit nicely with the idea in my post tbh. /DeadRow snip - signature removed, please email us with a link if you wish to know why. -Ivan K
Rhaegor Stormborn	Posted - 2007.04.08 15:56:00 - [83] Agent hubs need to be removed. Spread agents around evenly through Empire space with the highest quality agents being in low sec.
isAzmodeus	Posted - 2007.04.08 18:05:00 - [84] Move high-sec missions to instanced deadspace. Instead of warpgates, have mini-jumpgates that lead to the area. This area wouldn't be on local, etc... This could move missions to another node. There isn't much of a reason for high-sec missions to be probed out, anyway. Having all the combat on different nodes would help with lag immensely. Keep low-sec missions in-system. They should be able to be probed out. Originally by: CCP Sharkbait we are screwed. quote]

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.