| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
SwitchBl4d3
   |
Posted - 2004.01.11 02:02:00 -
[31]
i think i read somewhere that the netcode has a kind of correcting system so that a 360ms ping can play with a 20ms ping etc, whereby it balances things out.
for this to work all the clients have to send packets to each other and inturn re-exhange packets peer 2 peer and server.
so a 56k modem some jockey running a 550mhz 32mb graphics card a boradband user and some dude with a top notch setup, all have to shake hands and i think this is where the lag lies. i live about 10 miles from lynx in london, so in thory i should'nt lag against a player in USA, But i cant use my ping as a advantage or i might lock him quicker etc. So this is why this systems in place and it screws up the game..
solution all move to england. and buy a decent spec PC :P
"Teh lord of Nonni"
|
Xelios
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 02:03:00 -
[32]
Edited by: Xelios on 11/01/2004 02:05:28
Maybe CCP should ask Sony how they do it, you get some huge battles in Planetside with little or no lag at all.
As for regulating pings to balance advantages, that's bs. If you have a high ping or a crappy comp then you get disadvantaged, that simple. It shouldn't punish everyone else in the battle with crappy pings just because a couple guys are playing on **** connections.
|
Slithereen
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 02:12:00 -
[33]
 Quote:
Edited by: Kurvitsa on 11/01/2004 00:45:26
Yeah, Sally and I will quit. Permanently. And then you stupid carebears can go an sell 10 million trit for 250k ISK. We need to have goal in this game. I already have all battleships and 400 million.
What should I do now then.
Give them all to me, hehe.
_______________________________________________
"Is it me or the bad guys just getting totally pathetic?"---Clover, Totally Spies,
"Hope is wasted on the Hopeless."---Mandy, The Grim Adventures of Billy and Mandy.
"Stars are holes in the sky from which the light of the Infinite shine through."---Confucius.
|
Slithereen
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 02:17:00 -
[34]
Quote:
Stav summed it up nicely. Sounds like I missed a lot of waiting around and then bitter disappointment due to lag.
What EVE needs is the ability of fleet battles, small frigates and cruisers harassing opponent battleships while their battleships dish out damage. Anti-frigate frigates against the harassers etc.
Without lag fleet battles could become mindblowing spectacles of tactics, skills and preparations.
With the lag all we can do is engage in 10 vs 10 at most 
I favour the tactical, TFC was my game of choice many moons ago. Without fleet battles EVE becomes a pure economic game with uninteresting small skirmishes. I'm not saying that the economic side is worthless, it just needs the huge force that alliances and their fleets provide.
It's hard to do it with the kind of information levels has to process for each player in a game like EVE.
What's happening is simply we're hitting the boundaries of our own technological limitations---the internet infrastructure and server technology.
If you like fleet battles, go to darkspace.org.
I remember my own fleet battles in Allegiance, when there was as much as 64 people in one game. Suffice to say, I got frequent disconnections.
_______________________________________________
"Is it me or the bad guys just getting totally pathetic?"---Clover, Totally Spies,
"Hope is wasted on the Hopeless."---Mandy, The Grim Adventures of Billy and Mandy.
"Stars are holes in the sky from which the light of the Infinite shine through."---Confucius.
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 02:36:00 -
[35]
"We had a great battle last night with FA wich involved about 45 peaple total and lag was "minumum" compared tonights horror."
... Don't the server nodes cover few systems each, quite possibly systems not close to one another location-wise?
Maybe you guys were trying to have battle in system which happens to be held by the same node that covers Yulai or something equally busy... would explain performance difference. o.o;
|
Admiral IceBlock
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 02:38:00 -
[36]
Quote:
About the New Servers
EVE ONLINE will be hosted on brand new, state-of-the-art servers. These servers will enable CCP to host up to 100,000 gamers in the same world.
You would belive that does brand new, state-of-the-art servers would actully make the game lag free.
Quote:
Combat
Combat in EVE is incredibly fast and furious and will have you constantly strategizing about what measures you should take to best deal with each situation. Group tactics involve formation flight and squad-based communication, allowing for massive fleet battles with military standard hierarchies.
What can i say? ALL LIES!!!!
"We brake for nobody"
|
Sassinak
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 02:56:00 -
[37]
Quote:
not to mention all the bugs there are with gangs. we've been occupied all day with it..
yep it gets old ganging up 30 people.. you get to 31 OMG i got the session change bug... sigh... gang 30 people again... etc etc
Sass
Arcane Technologies |
Saladin
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 03:28:00 -
[38]
While I wasn't at the fight in question, I have been in a lot of fleet battles and faced great difficulty with the lag.
In the pre-castor HLW fight Noobius referred to, I warped into the fight and my fps slowed down to like 0.1. The screen was frozen most of the time and I warped in and out 3 times until I found it to be playable. The devs said that the problem is client side, so I have spent the past month looking at what to change in computer and various benchmark tests. I was going to go ahead with the upgrade next week, but some people I spoke to had system configurations very close to what I was planning (3 GHz processor, ATI Radeon 9800XT, 1GB RAM) and they said they have the same problem. So right now I'm not sure what I am going to do.
There is something else that really bugs me about the big battles. Pre-Castor, the threat window stopped working correctly in the big battles. It would come up, but come up empty. My hope was that the Auto-Scanner (post castor) wouldn't have the same problem, but it does. With all the lag you experience, it becomes imperative to be able to quickly select your targets, lock on and fire. So now you have to mouse over the ships, wait for the name to come up and then lock.
But lets think together how CCP can track down what causes this problem and solve it. How can the devs test this issue to collect data? Chaos is out of the question since its a small server and can't support the number of players required. Beef up chaos? that's a possibility. The other alternative I can think of is have the devs or GMs be on the look out for large blobs in known hotspots, they can hang in local and collect data while the fight rages. Don't know if they would be willing to wait hours until people fight though. Guess it depends on how badly they want to collect data and fix the problem
---------------------------
(c) Copyright Saladin, 2005.
Any editing of this post by a third party will be in violation United States Internet Copyright law 46525 of 2003. |
Stavros
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 03:36:00 -
[39]
http://acdev.org/moo/
Video there, sorry for crappy quality but necessary. Anyway yeah that gate that Stained so well demonstrates, should have 70 bships at it, notice how it is totally empty, both times he is there.
Lag yes, not being able to see your targets, no.
Stav
--
"Keep On Flaming Lamers, Like Your Ships Did When We Ended You" |
Admiral IceBlock
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 03:54:00 -
[40]
me thinks that the EVE graphic is serverside! 
"We brake for nobody"
|
Stained
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 04:36:00 -
[41]
That's why EVERYONE that warped out, then warped back in could not see any ships/ was unable to lock them.
___________________________________________________________________
Hair is Over-rated.
|
KrapYl
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 04:50:00 -
[42]
Edited by: KrapYl on 11/01/2004 04:52:45
Quote:
I find it amusing when braindead people like you are still allowed to post here
may i ask if u ever been banned for some serden posts on these very boards ? i believe u where ? maybe im remember wrong... and anyways... sorry... i stink from time to time... 
As for the lag, well, i'd expect lag of the laggy kind when 50+ gathered... its sad, and at some point i hope they find some way to get it fixed...
And planetside ??? sometimes i get FF penalty for driving over a teammate who i never saw... on a empty road, on an island with no wars... WTF... Anarchy-online was also mentioned... they now have "Crow Control"... NOT CCP... but a module they call Crow Control... wich dont let more than 30 of each faction/side be at one "shard"
a "shard" could be directly translated to an EVE Grid... so imagine noone could aproach a gate if 30 of ur own people allready was there... u would hit an invisible wall... not untill there was 29, could any one from ur side approach/enter the grid... some goes for oppesite side...
|
Booky
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 04:55:00 -
[43]
Heh, your screen was removed. Got it hosted anywhere else?
Spelling corrections welcome, but don't expect me to edit my post. |
Melchidael
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 05:13:00 -
[44]
Edited by: Melchidael on 11/01/2004 05:15:02
I'm not sure if this is an issue which can be solved without a rethink of some of the fundamental design decisions in eve.
IIRC, there was a post on the dev blog (btw, the dev blog archives need to be fixed) which detailed the setup of the TQ cluster: a large number of application (SOL) servers, and 2x DB backend servers. The SOL servers would do all of the calculations (e.g. did this shot hit, locations of player ships and equipment, etc) and take in the player inputs (activate this module, target this person, etc).
While this is great in terms of eliminating cheats and reducing bandwidth per player, the simple fact is that there is going to be an upper limit on the number of calculations involving a large number of objects (remember, in any battle, the SOL has to keep track of all the objects in that battle and everything they're doing) that any given server can do.
It can't necessarily be solved by having multiple SOLs involved in a battle, b/c then you get into issues of synchronization between them. If the SOL (or if there are multiple SOLs) has to write to the backend DB on top of all this, then that basically adds another layer of complexity to the situation (and potentially, another bottleneck).
Then again, I could be wrong. 
Edit: paragraphs
|
Dyvim Slorm
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 05:18:00 -
[45]
Stav's dead right on this one.
I was one system ahead checking incoming and the lag was getting bad even there.
Not to mention the gang and channel bugs, it's pretty amazing any battle took place at all.
Well done to everyone for sticking at it, a most enjoyable night in spite of the bugs.
|
Vacuole
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 07:59:00 -
[46]
Well some of the problem might be solved if the client just wouldn't load the ship 3D textured models after a certian number of ships in the grid is reached.
The game playability is inversely proportionate to the number of ships present, that is for sure. 40 ships in a grid and you got an ultra laggy, unweildly game in front of you.
|
Lifewire
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 11:25:00 -
[47]
I was in the NVA vs FE "battle". If the server isnt able to handle big fleet battles, the game isnt worth to play it. 30k players have worked for months to be able to maintain this fleets. Now the only thing they can do is go on and make more ISK and get more bored.
CCP, i think it is time to explain...at least CCP should have a plan to fix this in the next weeks, because all pvp-players will get really disapointd from this sad news.
|
KIATolon
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 12:50:00 -
[48]
Edited by: KIATolon on 11/01/2004 12:53:05
idd Lifewire, it was really laggy. It took a long time to switch modules on/off etc. The Autoscanner would just not work at all so picking targets was hard. I ended up getting a pounding by shad who I couldnt target back through a wall of drones & other players so I had to warp out & back in again.
My pc is crap though so I cant really complain. 1.4ghz with a GF4 Ti4600. People with good PC's who I've talked too experienced a lot less lag. I really think its mostly clientside lag I was experiencing.
|
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 13:03:00 -
[49]
What's worse is, having a broadband connection means crap all when the servers are optimized for 56k connections.
That's why it's so laggy.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 13:11:00 -
[50]
Edited by: Jim Raynor on 11/01/2004 13:16:26
turning off logging helps, btw. logging combat for some reason, creates ungodly amounts of lag, for me atleast.
optimized for 56k? is that why using a scanner takes 10 years? heh
------
ROBBLE ROBBLE |
LukAsh
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 13:29:00 -
[51]
Moo why don't you ask about fleet battles at the next CSM meeting?
___
WTB: +5 Implants. |
Negotiator
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 13:36:00 -
[52]
cuz it will be the usual "soon"(TM)
|
Seiun Darel
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 13:39:00 -
[53]
LMAO, Stavros you encounter lag with 50 players in the same system? omg what are you at, 56k? ISDN? hahah i've been with combat +80 ships a few MONTHS ago without any lag what so ever.
<<-- CGI Art -->>
|
LukAsh
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 13:44:00 -
[54]
Quote:
cuz it will be the usual "soon"(TM)
Then push them a bit to say more. This is in fact one of the most important issues now (even tech 2 isn't so important). What do we need player owned stations if we can't attack or defend them with fleets of 20+ ships?
___
WTB: +5 Implants. |
Dukath
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 13:50:00 -
[55]
Nothing new though. This problem has existed (and been reported) as long as i can remember, being early beta. It has improved a bit, from complete unplayable at 25 ships to completely unplayable at 40+ ships but it really needs more improvement.
I'm still waiting for an option to disable all graphical effects. So no loading of shipmodels, no weapon effects, all you'd see are the icons of the ships and missiles. If that doesn't remove the client side lag then nothing will.
|
Riddari
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 13:59:00 -
[56]
Quote:
LMAO, Stavros you encounter lag with 50 players in the same system? omg what are you at, 56k? ISDN? hahah i've been with combat +80 ships a few MONTHS ago without any lag what so ever.
¼©¼
a history |
Miss Take
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 14:02:00 -
[57]
Quote:
LMAO, Stavros you encounter lag with 50 players in the same system? omg what are you at, 56k? ISDN? hahah i've been with combat +80 ships a few MONTHS ago without any lag what so ever.
What a stupid reply, how is this in any way a constructive comment which adds to the topic?
Agree that this will have serious implications to the future of pvp where fleet battles become more prominant.
|
Sparta
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 14:53:00 -
[58]
I must add my agreement; the server could not handle this fleet battle. As a defender I had no problem targeting and hitting my mods. After about 3 minutes into the battle I had been targeted and had hvy shield damage. I warped to a planet and recharged shields, after the return warp all I saw was the gate and another defender who was returning from shield recharge. But the battle was there and all around me, with "something scambles something" messages. I felt dishearted too (got a cable modem, 1gig of RAM, a high end video card, and a fast machine). It was all ccp.
So sad, so sad. Is ccp at the top of the tech thru put here? If so true fleet battles are not possible in EVE; and we have to wait until someone else brings a fleet game out.
|
Estios
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 15:16:00 -
[59]
'Something is trying to target jam Something'
How many of you got that little beauty ? Its crazy. You jump in and land in deadspace and then warp to the gate you want to attack only to drop out of warp and not be able to see any ships.
Ive had this FAR more since Castor than anytime before and have only found it can be fixed by logging.
Fleet battles are indeed the pinnacle of combat, alas EVE simply cannot support them at all currently
So HMV consider Andy Williams and Dean Martin to be "easy listening" do they? Tell that to my mate Dave, he's been deaf for 20 years.
|
Art Dillinja
|
Posted - 2004.01.11 15:30:00 -
[60]
Quote:
'Something is trying to target jam Something'
One of my favorites. 
Huge fleet battles are more like gambling than anything else. The level of lag ensures that not the most skilled general wins the day, but the side that can gamble the longest, in other words: replace its losses.
It seems that inter - alliance warfare strategies have to be changed to small skirmishes only to avoid lag.
This is taking away one of the most interesting aspects of the whole game.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |