| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Zen Later
   |
Posted - 2004.01.26 13:26:00 -
[1]
If you didn't hear, yesterday there was the potential for a monumental battle in the core of Fountain.
Notice I said potential for...
Something seriously needs to be done a.s.a.p. about the game performance or, as was mentioned by an EVO member, there will be nothing greater than 10 v. 10 battles...a little exageration but not far from the truth.
*NOTE* The Allied forces notified GM's of the need for more nodes/bandwidth/server resources for the Fountain area (and in particular the YZ-LQL system). Also, a simple look at the map and you realize there is a daily massive battle going on there.
|
Yama Booshi
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 13:36:00 -
[2]
A lot of pleas for this are also made in this thread:
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=55649
|
Christopher Xen
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 14:25:00 -
[3]
Hey If we crash the server...blame ccp, they had plenty of advance notice. Several GMs know what both sides are capable of.
|
sutty
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 15:04:00 -
[4]
I really did think we crashed it when we jumped into z30, nothing was updating not even the time. then after 15 mins I finaly loaded
|
Lord Azraiel
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 18:29:00 -
[5]
CCP needs to ATLEAST DOUBLE their processing power, just wait till all these new people are in these corps and joining the fights. It will get even worse.
"I'm comin' for ya, and Hell's comin' with me!" |
Vacuole
|
Posted - 2004.01.27 02:48:00 -
[6]
I'm sure they're working on it. They probably don't want to become 'known' for this kind of thing.
I'm not suprised that there's been no official word addressing it all.. I think it'll just suddenly improve a great deal in a patch up the road.
Fleet battles will only get larger and more commonplace, so I hope that improvement isn't too many patches away. ;)
|
Slithereen
|
Posted - 2004.01.27 07:12:00 -
[7]
I don't know how they program, but they should use number of players as an indicator. If a system has more players on it, the servers should dynamically allocate more resources into that system at the expense of systems that do not have players on them. This should be done as seamless and as transparent as possible.
_______________________________________________
"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.
|
Statis
|
Posted - 2004.01.27 07:47:00 -
[8]
 Quote:
I don't know how they program, but they should use number of players as an indicator. If a system has more players on it, the servers should dynamically allocate more resources into that system at the expense of systems that do not have players on them. This should be done as seamless and as transparent as possible.
Think about what you said.. you'll see it doesn't work out that easy.
|
Carey
|
Posted - 2004.01.27 07:57:00 -
[9]
I have a solution... cancel your subscription and quit the game. The less people playing the better the server will run. We dont need everyone jamming up the server. Besides, why play a game when the server cant support its members.
Or, better yet... maybe if CCP actually banned members who exploited game bugs the sever wouldnt be so jammed. Just a thought... but as long as they pay... well... you know.
|
Preacha
|
Posted - 2004.01.27 11:34:00 -
[10]
Quote:
I have a solution... cancel your subscription and quit the game. The less people playing the better the server will run. We dont need everyone jamming up the server. Besides, why play a game when the server cant support its members.
Or, better yet... maybe if CCP actually banned members who exploited game bugs the sever wouldnt be so jammed. Just a thought... but as long as they pay... well... you know.
Yeah that will show them.....
One thing i just dont understand?,,they have "known" for some time now(i think 2 weeks at least)that these battles were and are going to be ongoing, why wait till minutes before both sides are ready to engage to say that we should not fight cause will "might" crash the server?
Let's get this fixed please.
|
babyblue
|
Posted - 2004.01.27 12:02:00 -
[11]
I don't think CCP should slow down 95% of the players just so 5% of them can have a gank fest (most of whom are either pirates or Alliance extortion experts). Perhaps you should have a separate cluster created all for yourself?
|
babyblue
|
Posted - 2004.01.27 12:05:00 -
[12]
Quote:
I don't know how they program, but they should use number of players as an indicator. If a system has more players on it, the servers should dynamically allocate more resources into that system at the expense of systems that do not have players on them. This should be done as seamless and as transparent as possible.
I'm sure it is already. Only there is a lot of state to transfer between nodes. Also, you login/logoff in groups which also causes lag because, once again, the setup costs of logging in are much higher than your ongoing running bandwidth requirements.
Also, consider your client-side might also be a little slow. There are so many variables. 
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |