EVE Search - Congratulations CCP on breaking the most concurrent users record!

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Congratulations CCP on breaking the most concurrent users record!

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 2 post(s)
Tobias Solem	Posted - 2007.06.26 08:02:00 - [1] Edited by: Tobias Solem on 26/06/2007 08:01:18 Can you now make so fleet fights aren't so incredibly lagged? Or else boasting about such numbers is just meaningless. "OH! We had 1000 people in a fleet fight" ... (I won't mention that half of them were stuck on the gate next door, and those in system never really had a "fight", they had a frustration with 1 frame per second and then getting disconnected). Seriously. I am now your boss, resolve the lag. When done so, I shall be silent, forever. That is all. Thank you.
tiewan	Posted - 2007.06.26 08:12:00 - [2] nope
Sian Tairnesh Gallente	Posted - 2007.06.26 08:18:00 - [3] It's always interesting to see that people think that lag could be solved by pointing a finger at the servers and command them to work properly... Or did you have another solution, Tobias? -------------------------------------------- We're sorry, something happened. -Sincerely, CCP
Laah T'Sin	Posted - 2007.06.26 09:42:00 - [4] well maybe making a feature-freeze for the next 6 months and investing every last ressource to try and get the game running smoothly would be a nice idea. i mean don0t get me wrong.. eve is a totally kickass game (lag or not) but it IS a major pain in the backside when you're simply stuck on a session change or hang in a large bubble with 1 frame every 20 seconds and lag that makes it impossible to even target someone. it was mentioned in one of the live dev blogs that the inter-process communications of the cluster was/will be changed to a much faster and more modern system but i think this should have absolut priority above all else... i don't want to sound scornful but things like heat are really not as important as a lag-free gameplay (or at least with less lag... it doesn't have to be perfect.. just playable even during large engagements).
Lal QelThyr Darkness Inc.	Posted - 2007.06.26 09:45:00 - [5] Edited by: Lal QelThyr on 26/06/2007 09:44:29 Perhaps this is the server telling you... oh I dont know. Dont bring 1000 people to a fleet fight? (And anyway, as soon as they fix it for 1000, you will all start bringing 1500. And you will again moan about the lag and blame CCP for not designing a good game)
Cypherous Minmatar Liberty Rogues Hammer Time.	Posted - 2007.06.26 09:45:00 - [6] Well apart for tripling the size and power of the cluster this isn't much that can be done with regards to those who want massive fleet battles, the server just can't deal with battles you randomly decide to fight on anode that just isn't prepared for that kind of load, also the FPS issue is down to the client PC rather than the cluster. ---------
Callthetruth Caldari Logical Logtistics	Posted - 2007.06.26 09:45:00 - [7] or dont blob
Laah T'Sin	Posted - 2007.06.26 09:46:00 - [8] Edited by: Laah T''Sin on 26/06/2007 09:48:09 you don't need 1000 ppl... just take a large gang (say 50) and jump into a system with 50 ppl guarding the gate.. now try and tell me that this is acceptable lag. oh and about clint-PC being to blame for the low FPS: well strangly i can play the most modern 3d games with 60 FPS and max details but eve with 0 details, no effects and no nothing still seems to be terrible. i even tried running eve in a RAM-drive but that didn't change anything.
Richard Aiel Caldari The Funkstars Guild	Posted - 2007.06.26 09:49:00 - [9] Hell, Blockade lvl 3 is lagtastic in a system devoid of people... I couldnt finish it because I was hovering around 1 frame per ten to 20 sec. Never had THIS problem pre patch And I dont get that much lag around Jita ======================================== I am Jack's complete and utter lack of surprise. The Threadkiller

CCP Redundancy	Posted - 2007.06.26 10:00:00 - [10] Originally by: Richard Aiel Hell, Blockade lvl 3 is lagtastic in a system devoid of people... I couldnt finish it because I was hovering around 1 frame per ten to 20 sec. Never had THIS problem pre patch And I dont get that much lag around Jita I think you're forgetting that only a select few systems are run on their own server. You can be in a system devoid of people, and yet sharing server resources with other systems that may or may not be over or under their average predicted load according to the load balancer. The number of people in local is not an absolute indicator of the server load for the server that runs that system.

Weer Treyt	Posted - 2007.06.26 10:19:00 - [11] Hmmm... makes me wonder. Wouldn't it be a nifty feature if you had a small traffic light in the corner of the UI to indicate the current server load? This way you could adapt accordingly and postpone your mission, happening, fleet battle, whatever till there is less load on the server. Weer Treyt
Drykor Minmatar Celtic Anarchy Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.06.26 10:53:00 - [12] Originally by: Laah T'Sin Edited by: Laah T''Sin on 26/06/2007 09:48:09 you don't need 1000 ppl... just take a large gang (say 50) and jump into a system with 50 ppl guarding the gate.. now try and tell me that this is acceptable lag. That's such a great suggestion, if it worked at all. How on earth are you going to tell people to only bring 50 people to a gate when they have a titan building in that system? And do you seriously think no one will bring more people anyway when the fight gets rough? The only solution is to be able to assign multiple nodes to 1 system, and this probably requires a **load of programming and a redesign of their server architecture. But this is still the only way they can ever make Eve grow. Originally by:** Laah T'Sin oh and about clint-PC being to blame for the low FPS: well strangly i can play the most modern 3d games with 60 FPS and max details but eve with 0 details, no effects and no nothing still seems to be terrible. i even tried running eve in a RAM-drive but that didn't change anything. Yeah I get terrible fps too even though I can play anything else decently.
Tareen Kashaar Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2007.06.26 10:58:00 - [13] Originally by: CCP Redundancy Originally by: Richard Aiel Hell, Blockade lvl 3 is lagtastic in a system devoid of people... I couldnt finish it because I was hovering around 1 frame per ten to 20 sec. Never had THIS problem pre patch And I dont get that much lag around Jita I think you're forgetting that only a select few systems are run on their own server. You can be in a system devoid of people, and yet sharing server resources with other systems that may or may not be over or under their average predicted load according to the load balancer. The number of people in local is not an absolute indicator of the server load for the server that runs that system. On that note, I'm curious how the server's responsiveness can manage to affect our FPS. Shouldn't the two, graphical client and server be less interdependent? Maybe this is just me being a programming noob of course, but I would be very happy to be enlightened. --- WTS: Forum Signatures, price negotiable. Evemail me!
Gariuys Evil Strangers Inc.	Posted - 2007.06.26 11:00:00 - [14] They are completely independent. It's just that situations that cause a lot of lag, tend to be the exact same situations ( in space that is ) that cause serious framerate drops. most noteably, large gatherings of ships. ;-)
Tareen Kashaar Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2007.06.26 11:03:00 - [15] Originally by: Gariuys They are completely independent. It's just that situations that cause a lot of lag, tend to be the exact same situations ( in space that is ) that cause serious framerate drops. most noteably, large gatherings of ships. ;-) Then why do FPS drop after fleetfights, even when there's no ships visible anywhere? And why is there no FPS drop when with my fleet in a safe before the fight, but afterwards? I don't get it. Rendering speeds should not be affected by network lag, unless I'm really missing something, which is why I asked for enlightenment. --- WTS: Forum Signatures, price negotiable. Evemail me!
Ogul Caldari ZiTek Deepspace Explorations Prime Orbital Systems	Posted - 2007.06.26 11:05:00 - [16] Originally by: Cypherous ... also the FPS issue is down to the client PC rather than the cluster. This is how it works in games like WoW. But EVE is very different, even in this respect.
Tobias Solem	Posted - 2007.06.26 11:12:00 - [17] I've been on three fleet fights on the same night, all with virtually the same numbers (approx 60 on each side) and in one case the gameplay was pretty solid (around 15fps), the other time it was unplayable (slideshow quality) ... and the last one half our gang was stuck on one gate, the other half jumping into a fleet of around 60 and even when waiting the cloak timers out, our reinforcements weren't able to jump in in time, because they had jump timers. If you say this is all clientside, then I call BS.
Gilbert Drillerson DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.06.26 11:12:00 - [18] It would be so nice if the loadbalancing wasnt static. As far as I know, node to solarsystem correlation cant change while the server is up. If I was chief software designer of CCP: * I would ask for a dynamic loadbalancing where if a node is overloaded, it becomes "frozen" for a few minutes while all or some lesser active solarsystems was migrated to another server. * I would ask the hardware guys to have a number of utterly pimped out servers to put the solar systems which currently have the biggest fights. Those servers should only be used dynamically and the solar systems that is moved there should automatically migrate back to their original nodes once load drops. I am sure it would require some (if not massive) rewrites of the server code, but it would be worth it. As it is right now, the node capacity limit is the ONE technical thing that I see limiting Eve's growth potential. Fleet battles is the end game of eve as I see it. It sure is the large scale conflict and battle that keeps me interested in my fourth year of being an eve subscriber. If I could really whish for anything I would suggest a rewrite that allows servers to be other than Microsoft operating system. Having the option to run a few mini-mainframe sized (maybe Linux) servers should give the ability to allow MASSIVE fleet battles when combined with some kind of dynamic load balancing. Dont get mad - Get even
Laah T'Sin	Posted - 2007.06.26 11:17:00 - [19] Originally by: Drykor Originally by: Laah T'Sin Edited by: Laah T''Sin on 26/06/2007 09:48:09 you don't need 1000 ppl... just take a large gang (say 50) and jump into a system with 50 ppl guarding the gate.. now try and tell me that this is acceptable lag. That's such a great suggestion, if it worked at all. How on earth are you going to tell people to only bring 50 people to a gate when they have a titan building in that system? And do you seriously think no one will bring more people anyway when the fight gets rough? That wasn't what i meant. I know that everyone always brings as many people as the hostiles plus 30% more (thats one of the problems i have with eve) but i only wanted to make an example that you do NOT need 1000 ppl to totally lag out a system... even if the blobs are only 50 players large the lag still is terrible and the game is unplayable. (that was in response to someone saying that the lag is our own fault because we bring a 1000 man fleet into battle)
Drykor Minmatar Celtic Anarchy Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.06.26 11:23:00 - [20] Originally by: Gilbert Drillerson * I would ask for a dynamic loadbalancing where if a node is overloaded, it becomes "frozen" for a few minutes while all or some lesser active solarsystems was migrated to another server. Unfortunately this gives people that do fast stealth attacks a disadvantage. Say you want to jump in a system, secure the gates and start putting cyno's up in there for taking down POSses, this lag will give the owners of the system a chance to get THEIR fleet over there so you won't be able to secure the gate, your unpredicted attack will be meaningless. And TS won't freeze either.
Tom Gunn Caldari North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2007.06.26 11:30:00 - [21] I asked this question to the CEO in one of the first live dev chats as I agree with the above poster, new toys to play with are good, but lets have the old ones working first. I was assured lag would be significantly reduced as part of some new graphics/code that was going in. I didn't understand all the terms and technical talk that was used, but i'm sure someone else can give further info about that. As for those people saying 'only take 50' or 'don't blob', thats a very naive and not thought out comment. If I took a fleet of 10 ships to attack a system, the defenders would bring more to defend, in turn i'd be forced to call in more ships etc. In warefare, what i'm describing is referred to as escalation, and pretty soon you end up with blob fests and fleet battles of hundreds vs hundreds. You have to consider whats at stake, 0.0 soverign space and an alliance often takes months to setup and put in place, when a fleet threatens what you've worked to build over that time, you have to (if your able) put a fleet together that can oust the attackers, and numbers in eve count alot more than they do in modern warfare. Thats the nature of EvE warfare. The titan with its DD was supposed to deter blobbing, by the fact it could AoE masses of ships, but there is a huge disparity between this and what it was trying to emulate in real warfare - the economic loss of a huge portion of your fleet in EvE is replaceable almost instantly. The economics of EvE are not a deterrant to stop a player engaging in a massive battle, even if they might lose their T1 or T2 fitted BS to the enemy, they can replace their ship almost instantly and any isk associated cost in a day or two's ratting. With nothing really to lose (personal level), there's no deterrant to players fighting (besides knowing it will be laggy and a boring gate camp) - The costs of losing a personal ship, even for hundreds of pilots, does not outweigh the pains of losing an outpost and being ejected from 0.0. Of course for attacking, you have really nothing to lose and everything to gain, so again, there's no reason to really not to blob and in fact, every reason too 'blob' As server numbers grow/more players move into 0.0, the size of fleets will continue to rise and larger blobs will form. The only way to resolve this is to put in place a structure of system warefare that means ships do not have to all be in the same system at the same time, thus forcing attackers and defenders to be fighting across several systems at once.
John McFly Ganja Labs Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.26 11:51:00 - [22] Playing EVE during a fleet battle is like watching a powerpoint presentation: You get an idea of whats going on based on a new view every 5-10 seconds, but the audio portion (vent, TS, whatever) really tells you want is going on. At least until even the guy with the super computer is lagged out. Then you're just screwed.
Gutsani Chaos Reborn	Posted - 2007.06.26 11:55:00 - [23] Its strategy, they lag out the servers so hard, and allow you to log in. You manage to log in, you cant do **, and you cant log out again. Now 40000 people do that on sunday -> new concurrent user record! Seriously though, you do realise that there are ALOT of websites that have more then 50000 visitors a minute? And they dont have a 15 minute responce time, now you can go and claim that a webserver is not a mmo server, that is however not the point. Eve concurrent user record means nothing .. Offcourse its a good indication for hellmar to know how manny new idiots he has to hire \o/ ------------------------ Stop reading my siggy!**
tommit	Posted - 2007.06.26 12:36:00 - [24] Originally by: Sian Tairnesh It's always interesting to see that people think that lag could be solved by pointing a finger at the servers and command them to work properly... Or did you have another solution, Tobias? actually there was one guy (cant remember who now its so long time ago) that knew a hell of alot about servers and he came up with a whole very descrbing way to solve the server lag and make sure that the server "power" where used on those nodes that are heavely overloaded. but well, you have to actually adress the problem to fix it
Lamis	Posted - 2007.06.26 16:14:00 - [25] What about getting a server or two, that will just bounce around and take the load as needed? They could help in the heavy traffic systems (Jita) while they arent needed, and when a mess of several players are detected in 0.0 (Think it'd be pretty easy to code) they stop helping out and then go to boost performance in that one area. Not sure what would happen if they had multiple fleets at once, but for the major 400+ people fights, they would really give it a hand.

CCP Redundancy	Posted - 2007.06.26 16:54:00 - [26] Originally by: Tom Gunn I was assured lag would be significantly reduced as part of some new graphics/code that was going in. I didn't understand all the terms and technical talk that was used, but i'm sure someone else can give further info about that. We're doing a lot of optimization in Trinity as we're building Trinity2.0, having pinpointed a large number of the architectural problems with how the original engine was put together. It was impractical to fix these issues in smaller patches, because they would have required a hideously large number of content changes in some very difficult ways, and a metric craptonne of testing to implement. In general, network lag should not affect client responsiveness, but while Eve is running on a single thread, it might be possible for a blocking operation in Python to hold other stuff up (not my area)... if not, we're certainly taking hits with disk IO not being asynchronous yet. There's also a load of stuff going on with the server side of things, but generally those things don't have sexy names or produce screenshots, and are not particularly easy to explain, so we just get on with them quietly.

Jim McGregor	Posted - 2007.06.26 16:58:00 - [27] Is the new network layer multithreaded? --- Originally by: CCP Wrangler You're not supposed to feel like you're logging in to a happy, happy, fluffy, fluffy lala land filled with fun and adventures, thats what hello kitty online is for.
Gutsani Chaos Reborn	Posted - 2007.06.26 17:00:00 - [28] Originally by: CCP Redundancy In general, network lag should not affect client responsiveness, but while Eve is running on a single thread, it might be possible for a blocking operation in Python to hold other stuff up (not my area)... if not, we're certainly taking hits with disk IO not being asynchronous yet. So, you finally found your bug in the webbrowser? Congrats i guess, about 2 years after i reported it. ------------------------ Stop reading my siggy!
Praesus Lecti Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2007.06.26 17:24:00 - [29] Originally by: CCP Redundancy It was impractical to fix these issues in smaller patches, because they would have required a hideously large number of content changes in some very difficult ways, and a metric craptonneof testing to implement. You Euros and your metric system. What's that in Imperial? Is it 1.6 metric craptonnes per 1 short craptonne, 1 deadweight craptonne or 1 long ton? Is a craptonne 1000 crapkilograms or is it 2000 crapkilograms. If it's just 1000 crapkilograms per craptonne, that's 2,200 crappounds and with 2,000 pounds per short ton your 1 metric craptonne would be 1.1 short craptons...I think. However it works out, it appears to be alot of work.
torswin Caldari Capital Productions Inc.	Posted - 2007.06.26 17:30:00 - [30] Definition of craptonne: A lot. ---

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.