EVE Search - Sorry but it seems that we need instanced battle fields (WOW ahoi!)

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Sorry but it seems that we need instanced battle fields (WOW ahoi!)

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 11:32:00 - [1] Right now the nodes just CAN'T handle huge fleet engagements and it does not seem that the need for speed initiative did anything but force blobbing. Thus the only solutions are either to fight on dedicated server's who can handle 4-500 people at once (see Jita who can handle 600 people with quite ok performance since the last few patches) or have a limit on how many people can enter a system/node at once. Having a limit of 200 people/node is reasonable i think but quite tricky to implement and probably just would **** off people who have to get in a specific system to get to they're assets. So for epic fleet engagements it would just be simpler to have a dedicated server where all participants jump to and then fight like in a tournaments (wow style). I know this sucks, no more sniping from behind, jumping out, use ueber tactics (at this point with this lagg/desync fest going on tactics became irrelevant anyway tbh)! BUT at least fighting would be possible! After the last 2-3 fleet engagements with 200-500 participants i just CAN'T see any other solution. Do you?
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 11:40:00 - [2] Originally by: Dread Phantom Edited by: Dread Phantom on 29/07/2007 11:35:04 How would it being instanced reduce lag, theres still 100s of people fighting, we are up against a problem with very limited hardware/software solutions and social solutions are unrealistic Im not sure how the nodes calculate whatever. But on a dedicated server there wont be any asteroids/rats/travelers to calculate. So its whole capacity could be dedicated to the actual fight. Also i would like like to point again to the Jita node which can support 700 people without causing to much lagg/desync/trouble:)
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 12:23:00 - [3] Originally by: Gutsani there is this drop down box on the login screen, select serentiy. onoes! its a instant pvp server hmm u chinese? anyway dude i'm serious, if we want 400+ man fleet battles to actually happen and not crash the nodes ccp has to deliver a solution. i think instancing is quite a easy to implement one..
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 12:56:00 - [4] Edited by: d026 on 29/07/2007 12:56:27 Originally by: Price Watcher CCP will almost certainly not shard the server. They are quite proud of their non-sharded status. It's one of the things that makes EVE unique. I do hope they finally find an unsharded way to fix the lag. Sound off. Turret Effects off. All other Effects off. Zoom out to where you can't see your ship or anyone else's. Now you can fight, but you only get 1-2 frames per second. Kind of takes the fun out of a fleet battle. doesn't work sorry:)
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 12:59:00 - [5] Originally by: Verone ahahahahahahaha Instances... got a better solution?
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 13:14:00 - [6] Originally by: Raevenor D026, shut up you don't know what the ****. Instances are not the answer. so whats the answer smartass? i never said this the one and only solution. just one that would actually work right now!
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 13:24:00 - [7] it adds more than it takes away. we don't need to interact with that guy in jita if we have a 500+ fleet fight but we need a server who can handle teh calculations for the period of the fight. Because the regular nodes CAN'T handle those we need dedicated servers (instances) where the fight can happen.. it doesent substract much from the game but adds epic fleet warfare!
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 13:39:00 - [8] Originally by: Verone Originally by: d026 we need dedicated servers (instances) where the fight can happen.. it doesent substract much from the game but adds epic fleet warfare! If you believe this, then you really do have no idea what Eve is all about or what CCP are trying to achieve by creating a seamless game environment on one cluster. The whole principle of using instances, shards, or any other form of environmental split from tranquility be it hardware or software goes against the fundemental principle of what Eve Online is. If you want to play with instances, go raid some dungeon full of Orcs and Goblins for the Holy Shoes of Glarth'Rhphrl'phl (+7 to wtfpwn) for the 500th time in a week. i give a **** about a single server if you cant play on it:)
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 13:40:00 - [9] Originally by: Verone Wait until the exchange into Revelations is complete and all the new coding, graphics, physics and optimization is complete before whining? i'm playing the game NOW not in 2 years. Originally by: Verone Bunch of people who want to win so badly and can't face the horror of loss that they get the most MASSIVE blob of players they can. In response their opponent says "omg moar damage!" and fields 150% their numbers. 1. game mechanics force you to blob on many occasions. 2. its stupid if you try to appeal to peoples good consciences in a mmorpg just to field lesser numbers not hurting the nodes but die to the other blob. 3. we blob because game mechanics allow it and it is advantageous. Originally by: Verone Cue massive whining on Eve-O about how CCP suck and their crap servers are killing the game, when in fact it's the 500 people too scared about losing a fight out in the middle of nowhere that have caused the issue. im not whining im suggesting change, even tough i knew it wont be popular. you on teh otehr hand are trolling and flaming:) Originally by: Verone If CCP makes fleets stable, people will just think "OMG NOW WE CAN BLOB WITH MOAR PEOPLEZ! TEH SURVUR CAN HANDLE ANOTHAR 500 ON GRID!11ONE DEPLOY TEH TITAN!11" No that wont happen because if you are instanced the server could reject any reinforcements if server load gets to high...
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 13:42:00 - [10] Edited by: d026 on 29/07/2007 13:42:44 Originally by: Verone Originally by: Ogul Originally by: Verone Maybe you could all just stop blobbing? Ever thought of that? You do realize that instancing would keep the numbers in an engagement down to managable levels? By limiting the number of people allowed in there... Take this suituation : Fleet A enters instance. Fleet B enters instance. Fleets fight. Death. Explosions. Smacktalk. Survivors leave. Now, during this, Fleet C decides they want to come and rumble, because they don't really like fleet A, or B... oh no... they can't get into the instance, wtf full?! What's this? Somewhere in Eve we're locked out of? A piece of game environment we can't use? Isn't this supposed to be a shardless, seamless single environment mmog where players can have an intricate effect on the political goings on inside the world? So, an opportunity for a third party to get involved in a war with a surprise attack is negated... Sorry, but that's not Eve, it just doesn't cut the mustard. accept it eve cant handle the load. and im not gonna wait till they invent quantum computers to be actually able to play a 200 vs 200. eitehr instance or reduce gang size to 25 and sys cap to 50 people.
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 13:44:00 - [11] Originally by: Verone Originally by: Ogul Originally by: Verone Maybe you could all just stop blobbing? Ever thought of that? You do realize that instancing would keep the numbers in an engagement down to managable levels? By limiting the number of people allowed in there... Take this suituation : Fleet A enters instance. Fleet B enters instance. Fleets fight. Death. Explosions. Smacktalk. Survivors leave. Now, during this, Fleet C decides they want to come and rumble, because they don't really like fleet A, or B... oh no... they can't get into the instance, wtf full?! What's this? Somewhere in Eve we're locked out of? A piece of game environment we can't use? Isn't this supposed to be a shardless, seamless single environment mmog where players can have an intricate effect on the political goings on inside the world? So, an opportunity for a third party to get involved in a war with a surprise attack is negated... Sorry, but that's not Eve, it just doesn't cut the mustard. and by the way, right now, fleet c would not have any chance to enter the fight anyway due to completely overloaded nodes:)
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 13:45:00 - [12] Originally by: Verone Originally by: d026 Originally by: Verone Cue massive whining on Eve-O about how CCP suck and their crap servers are killing the game, when in fact it's the 500 people too scared about losing a fight out in the middle of nowhere that have caused the issue. im not whining im suggesting change, even tough i knew it wont be popular. you on teh otehr hand are trolling and flaming:) If I was flaming, trust me, I'd be a lot harsher. If I was trolling, I'd be telling you I think you suck etc, which I'm not. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and while my attitude might come across as agressive, my point is perfectly valid. The single environment we play in is one of the prime factors that I, and literally thousands of other people play Eve for. Destroying that turns Eve-Online into just another MMOG, set in space, without elves and orcs. but how if both parties agree to go to a secure area for the time beeing? no harme done except for fleet c, who could actually request a invite to the instance to..
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 13:46:00 - [13] Originally by: d026 Originally by: Verone Originally by: d026 Originally by: Verone Cue massive whining on Eve-O about how CCP suck and their crap servers are killing the game, when in fact it's the 500 people too scared about losing a fight out in the middle of nowhere that have caused the issue. im not whining im suggesting change, even tough i knew it wont be popular. you on teh otehr hand are trolling and flaming:) If I was flaming, trust me, I'd be a lot harsher. If I was trolling, I'd be telling you I think you suck etc, which I'm not. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and while my attitude might come across as agressive, my point is perfectly valid. The single environment we play in is one of the prime factors that I, and literally thousands of other people play Eve for. Destroying that turns Eve-Online into just another MMOG, set in space, without elves and orcs. but how if both parties agree to go to a secure area for the time beeing? no harme done except for fleet c, who could actually request a invite to the instance to.. and i agree it takes aways some interesting tactical options. but somethimes after 6 hours warming up and sitting on gates flying 50 systems to the enemy you JUST WANT TO FIGHT AND NOT LAGG OUT!
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 13:56:00 - [14] Edited by: d026 on 29/07/2007 13:57:52 Originally by: Verone Regardless of the persistant whining with regards to server stability, what you're asking for is a fundemental change in the way Eve-Online is structured, how it's played and what effect a player can have on the game and it's environment. Adding instances basically destroys everything CCP has broke their backs trying to achieve over the last four years (read a single shardless environment). Basically what you're asking is for something that ulitmatley negates the basic structure and meaning of what Eve Online actually is. Again, It's a bad idea. Besides that you want to denie us a enjoiable time in eve fleet fighting (after spending hours and hours of logistics in advance), you just dont get that superblobbs are just what eve is about RIGHT NOW. So ccp either has to completely change game mechanics in favour of small scale assaults (where they seem to fail to) or give us enough server resources to handle such huge fleets. Both would/will change how we play eve today.
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 14:01:00 - [15] Edited by: d026 on 29/07/2007 14:01:31 Originally by: Verone Edited by: Verone on 29/07/2007 13:58:50 Originally by: Ogul Originally by: Verone Adding instances basically destroys everything CCP has broke their backs trying to achieve over the last four years (read a single shardless environment). Yes, they tried. And they failed. You're still playing aren't you? along with 200,000 other people? Ergo, they haven't failed. sorry mate in regards to fleet warfare they have. if you don't agree you probably should join a bigger blobb once in a while.)
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 14:07:00 - [16] Edited by: d026 on 29/07/2007 14:08:16 Originally by: Verone Originally by: d026 So ccp either has to completely change game mechanics in favour of small scale assaults (where they seem to fail to)... ...Both would/will change how we play eve today. I've been running small scale assaults for four years (read <50 people in gang). I've never had issues. I've also been in some of the largest showings of capital fleets in game over the last couple of years, and been involved in a 8,000 man fight for an outpost over the space of two weeks. Instancing the game would change a lot of people's attitudes toward playing it, and would drive a lot of people away. Coupled with that, it would destroy the level of interaction that makes Eve the game it is. Again... Nope, bad idea. mate thats not what i meant. you dont take over a system with a 20-50 man gang these days. i also never have issues with a 20-50 man gang. but if you are going to take over a outpost you NEED numbers. so if ccp wont grant us epic 10000man fleets they have to give us REAL tools to be effective at disabling pos's with only 20 ships and at the same time deffend us from the 400 man blobb from the enemy trying to deffend theyre home space... and im not talking about crap like disabling station services...
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 14:11:00 - [17] Originally by: Verone Coupled with that, it would destroy the level of interaction that makes Eve the game it is. Please accept the fact that right now there is often NO INTERACTION at all due to server side limitations..
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 14:12:00 - [18] Originally by: Verone Originally by: d026 Originally by: Verone Originally by: d026 So ccp either has to completely change game mechanics in favour of small scale assaults (where they seem to fail to)... ...Both would/will change how we play eve today. I've been running small scale assaults for four years (read <50 people in gang). I've never had issues. I've also been in some of the largest showings of capital fleets in game over the last couple of years, and been involved in a 8,000 man fight for an outpost over the space of two weeks. Instancing the game would change a lot of people's attitudes toward playing it, and would drive a lot of people away. Coupled with that, it would destroy the level of interaction that makes Eve the game it is. Again... Nope, bad idea. mate thats not what i meant. you dont take over a system with a 20-50 man gang these days. i also never have issues with a 20-50 man gang. but if you are going to take over a outpost you NEED numbers. so if wont grant us epic 10000man fleets they have to give us REAL tools to be effective at disabling pos's with only 20 ships and at the same time deffend us from the 400 man blobb from the enemy trying to deffend theyre home space... and im not talking about crap like disabling station services... I've bolded the part of my post you quoted and seemed to have totally missed. Motherships, titans, carrier blobs, fighter jockeying in a rifter, fleet fights in an abbaddon, shooting towers, shooting outposts. Done it. With 400 people on grid. Lag has never bothered me, I've been involved in a node death before, several times in fact. It happens. The issues are there, my point is that instancing isn't the way to solve them and will only drive people away from the game. ok mate, lets work on a solution other than ionstancing then. im open to suggestions:)
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 14:17:00 - [19] Originally by: Asestorian I would quit EVE instantly if they put in instances, and I would never come back, because I would no longer trust CCP to make good decisions even if they removed the instances again. My answer to this is the answer I give to people wanting to change game mechanics to stop ISK sellers. Stop screwing over the idea and basis of the game just because of a certain problem. I agree with Verone here, wait till CCP have released their brand spanking new engine before you complain more about lag. Changing a fundamental part of the game is not a solution to lag. I don't have a solution myself, because I'm not the most technically competent person around (and you really need to be in order to make decisions about this stuff). sorry mate i wont accept that i just spent 8 hours drawing a plot, scouting 100 systems, using 100 cynofields to jump our carriers/dreads 50lightyears up in hostile space, holding on every gate for 5 minutes to let stragglers keep up, just to desync/crash/notabletologginagain at the destination gate!
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 14:31:00 - [20] Originally by: Asestorian Look, I know lag sucks. It sucks massively. But we can't compromise the game and the potential fun it can bring because of it. sorry you are narrow-minded period!
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 14:38:00 - [21] Edited by: d026 on 29/07/2007 14:39:10 Originally by: Verone Originally by: d026 ok mate, lets work on a solution other than ionstancing then. im open to suggestions:) The scrapping of the need to drop a blob of towers for sovreignty, and the slimming down on a large scale of pos warfare and the ping pong effect with sovreignty. A cut down on the fuelling requirements of towers without the need to have Sovreignty level 2.713-4/A Section 12. Removal of the five day wait for sovreignty, which reduces the need for a large operation to stay static for so long. Creating multiple objectives in different areas of a constellation needed simoultaneously to get sovreignty to break up a fleet into smaller more manageable groups. The scrapping of the immense load that's created by a fleet fight by optimising code and cutting down on packet transfer between the client and server if possible. Streamlining of the interface and coding that is used to control fighter drones, they cause massive lag. Fixes to the overview and gang windows to make them at least semi-reliable. More importantly. The ability to DESTROY an outpost. Too many of them are springing up, 0.0 is turning into empire space too fast for the playerbase to control it effectively. I can think of lots more ways to change Eve, without resorting to cheap ideas that put it in the category of any other off the shelf MMOG. Of course, I'm not a Developer, so whether these ideas are feasable are an entirely different matter. thats all dandy and fancy etc.. but imho doesnt solve the blobbing issue. if we like to keep eve as it is we have to reduce gang size to max 50 people. and something like a stacking penalty for each target lock on a single ship. also other game mechanic changes to make it not favourable to blobb. i mean if i want to take down (or destroy) this outpost, why should i fields 50 people instead of 500?
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 14:46:00 - [22] Originally by: Asestorian If you reduce the gang size people will just make more gangs. If you add a stacking penalty for each ship shooting another, it doesn't discourage blobbing, it encourages good tactics. Also, I'm sorry I like the idea behind EVE and don't want to compromise it because of a technical problem. I guess that makes me narrow minded on the issue, but I don't care. so you rather keep it this way but unplayable. i dont get you rly:)
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 14:54:00 - [23] Originally by: Verone Originally by: d026 i mean if i want to take down (or destroy) this outpost, why should i fields 50 people instead of 500? and that my friend, is the ultimate question. see there we are again, either reinforce nodes or kill the blobb. both would mean extrem changes to game mechanics and probably destroy eve as you love it today.. anyway its just not possible to keep eve as open ended as it is. ccp has to implement a limit on whats possible. the servers showed us for the past weeks that they are just not capable of handling what the players are doing in this open end sandbox. so there is need for change and imho soon (not in 2 years i wont be playing then for sure:)or 0.0 will become completely static and dull and the question is to if this wouldn't **** of more people than a convenient dedicated server where you can outsource your fighting for a short period of time..
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 14:56:00 - [24] Edited by: d026 on 29/07/2007 14:57:33 Originally by: Krugerrand And how will instancing fleet pvp resolve the issue of taking space? "Alliance A contests [system name], do you wish to jump to fleet fight system?" Alliance B - No System stays in same hand? well dunno mate, some sort of penalty for not accepting the pewpew? automatic lose? not lose the system but selfdestruct all ships?:)
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 15:01:00 - [25] Originally by: Tarminic Originally by: d026 Originally by: Verone Originally by: d026 Uninformed dribble Awesome Stuff Verone, you have just given me hope for EVE's player base and humanity as well. Thankyou. Originally by: d026 Im not sure how the nodes calculate whatever. But on a dedicated server there wont be any asteroids/rats/travelers to calculate. So its whole capacity could be dedicated to the actual fight. Also i would like like to point again to the Jita node which can support 700 people without causing to much lagg/desync/trouble:) First of all, calculations for NPCs, asteroids, etcetera are very, very small compared to a fleet battle. I doubt that removing those would have any noticeable effect on fleet combat. Second of all, very few of the 700 people in Jita are shooting at each other, so that isn't a viable solution. Market lag is based primarily in DB access/update speeds, not server speed. Third of all, fleet lag increases on a polynomial basis. Do you know what this means? It means that 10 people involved in a fleet battle use X amount of processing power, but 20 people use 4X processing power. So instead of 100 people using ten times as much proccessing power as 10 people, it ends up being closer to 1000X. Currently, assuming that the server breaks at 700 people, doubling the hardware would only mean that it would break at around 950 people, not 1400. And no matter what the hardware of the server can handle, people will just blob harder until it breaks. not rly.. just add a limit on how many people could join the instance.. each 50/100/200 max. whatever teh server can handle. actually not much of a problem imho.
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 15:08:00 - [26] Quote: To me, its a step away from consensual pvp and other Eve fundamentals, not to mention there is no guarantee lag will be removed from these instances if there are still 300+ on, its still a lot of people. same here mate.. but i really rather play anything else right now than constantly getting lagged out the game after hours of dedication to a op. so the trade off is reduced flexibility for maximized stability..
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 15:17:00 - [27] as an outbreak and your hit fast and hard run solo gankage tactics you are probably not that much affected by blobb issues anyway. so i can understand that you dont feel my pain:) (sorry if im completely wrong:)
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 15:17:00 - [28] Originally by: Liten Lisa Originally by: d026 Quote: To me, its a step away from consensual pvp and other Eve fundamentals, not to mention there is no guarantee lag will be removed from these instances if there are still 300+ on, its still a lot of people. same here mate.. but i really rather play anything else right now than constantly getting lagged out the game after hours of dedication to a op. so the trade off is reduced flexibility for maximized stability.. Can I have your stuff?? can i shoot your pod?
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 15:21:00 - [29] Originally by: Sniper Kalahari Originally by: Verone I'm all for killing the blob. Instancing is never the answer. Eve is already instanced. Each system is an instance. The issue you have with it, is the notion of making them PRIVATE. What I would say is that instancing is cool, so long as they are PUBLIC and open to anyone. ok lets make them PUBLIC but then we have the problem again that the server cant handle it:) make them public with a 400 man limit then we got the problem that the quicker outnumbers the slower.. make them public with a limit for each side 3rd party cant join..
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 15:22:00 - [30] Originally by: Liten Lisa Originally by: d026 Originally by: Liten Lisa Originally by: d026 Quote: To me, its a step away from consensual pvp and other Eve fundamentals, not to mention there is no guarantee lag will be removed from these instances if there are still 300+ on, its still a lot of people. same here mate.. but i really rather play anything else right now than constantly getting lagged out the game after hours of dedication to a op. so the trade off is reduced flexibility for maximized stability.. Can I have your stuff?? can i shoot your pod? You could.. but we're not in the same instance i dont have to i come to jita..
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 15:26:00 - [31] Originally by: Weavil Zun Originally by: d026 Originally by: Liten Lisa Originally by: d026 Originally by: Liten Lisa Originally by: d026 Quote: To me, its a step away from consensual pvp and other Eve fundamentals, not to mention there is no guarantee lag will be removed from these instances if there are still 300+ on, its still a lot of people. same here mate.. but i really rather play anything else right now than constantly getting lagged out the game after hours of dedication to a op. so the trade off is reduced flexibility for maximized stability.. Can I have your stuff?? can i shoot your pod? You could.. but we're not in the same instance i dont have to i come to jita.. You really are quite dense. Peace out. can i have your stuff first?
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.29 15:27:00 - [32] Originally by: Sniper Kalahari Originally by: d026 Originally by: Sniper Kalahari Originally by: Verone I'm all for killing the blob. Instancing is never the answer. Eve is already instanced. Each system is an instance. The issue you have with it, is the notion of making them PRIVATE. What I would say is that instancing is cool, so long as they are PUBLIC and open to anyone. ok lets make them PUBLIC but then we have the problem again that the server cant handle it:) make them public with a 400 man limit then we got the problem that the quicker outnumbers the slower.. make them public with a limit for each side 3rd party cant join.. Well OK, your always gonna reach a point where the numbers will nuke the server, but if there was a bunch of jita size servers whose only purpose in life was to host these public instance fleet fights it would be plenty better than it is now. thats is quite my point:)
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.30 04:09:00 - [33] Originally by: VinceNoir Edited by: VinceNoir on 30/07/2007 01:28:37 Originally by: d026 Edited by: d026 on 29/07/2007 14:57:33 Originally by: Krugerrand And how will instancing fleet pvp resolve the issue of taking space? "Alliance A contests [system name], do you wish to jump to fleet fight system?" Alliance B - No System stays in same hand? well dunno mate, some sort of penalty for not accepting the pewpew? automatic lose? not lose the system but selfdestruct all ships?:) Are you taking the **? Do you realise how much this would change (ruin) Eve? This is one of the dumbest things ever posted on GD and that's saying something. How about instead of running to the forums about how ** CCP's game is you either quit and go back to Wow/EQ/pointy hatted beard elf game # 765 instances or accept that everyone suffers from the same lag, CCP are aware of the issue and just wait for the fix. i rather adapt to a new smooth running enjoyable but different eve than stick with this unplayable laggfest.
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.30 05:54:00 - [34] Originally by: Kishu instances... because fleet battles never expand to another system or move to chase the enemy/get to the next pos/outpost, gotta get more ships.. How would one propose to instance a game where people are constantly moving around during the battle(s)? you then have to make the best with what you've got in your fleet on a specific grid. removes one tactical layer but adds another one. in the end the result is more fighting, less lag, less moving which imho is good anyway..
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.30 05:58:00 - [35] Originally by: Boma Airaken Verone wins EvE. That is all. so the only guy here bashing alliance warfare (the whole point of eve) wins eve?
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.30 06:12:00 - [36] Originally by: Great Artista Originally by: d026 Edited by: d026 on 30/07/2007 06:08:26 Originally by: Great Artista Originally by: d026 Originally by: Boma Airaken Verone wins EvE. That is all. so the only guy here bashing alliance warfare (the whole point of eve) wins eve? Well I'm sorry, but Verone just wins. YES I am in v7. I was there 10h straight in that big fight last saturday. Im not whining, lag is same to everyone, either am I not blaming you people for bringing 400 man fleet there, thus causing the 3min delay in... everything. In the current system, only solution for taking over systems IS making massive fleets. It needs a total change, instances are not it. so whats then change then? also lagg is not an issue as long as you cant even logg in/load completely desync and cant load the system for 70mins... Well its not instances for sure prove it:)
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.30 06:13:00 - [37] Originally by: Baugoti doing this will get rid of roaming gangs as we know it. Right now u have fleets that pack up and start roaming all over eve. By making these gangs go to separate servers gets rid of the whole point to roam. They can just go hey Hostile A. We want to fight we have 100.. Hostile A goes.. ok loading 100 into instance.. thank you for fighting. Meanwhile.. somewhere in between Fleet A and Hostile A Space.. macro ratters and macro miners rejoice cuz no hostiles are going to come in because they just loaded up an instance and dint have to travel through. Mining gangs rejoice because they can mine 24/7 and flood the market with everything and before you know it i would be able to buy an Aeon for 10 isk. It would also change pos warfare... Group A usually warps to a pos and begins to fire. Group B comes to defend. With seperate servers or 'instances' would Group A just ask Group B to load a POS onto the server so they can shoot it. I see your point and where you are coming from, but by doing it you will just kill everything about EvE. No i dont see that this would have any inpact on roaming. You still can go to teh enemy system with 20-30 ships and kll theyre ratters.. .
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.30 06:16:00 - [38] Originally by: Arkios Odymei Originally by: Verone Bunch of people who want to win so badly and can't face the horror of loss that they get the most MASSIVE blob of players they can[...] Everyone jumps in, shock horror the server has a brainfart! Nodes die, babies cry, raptor jesus curses everyone, mission runners in Jita lose their CNR's to a Gursitas Arrogator because of a Tsunami of lag and node drops. Cue massive whining on Eve-O about how CCP suck and their crap servers are killing the game, when in fact it's the 500 people too scared about losing a fight out in the middle of nowhere that have caused the issue. If CCP makes fleets stable, people will just think "OMG NOW WE CAN BLOB WITH MOAR PEOPLEZ! TEH SURVUR CAN HANDLE ANOTHAR 500 ON GRID!11ONE DEPLOY TEH TITAN!11" That summs it up quite nicely, tbh. no we do not have to discuss human behavour here. we play a game and in this game we are blobbing and contine to blobb as long as tehre arent any serious game changes.
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.30 06:18:00 - [39] Originally by: Great Artista Originally by: d026 Originally by: Great Artista Originally by: d026 Edited by: d026 on 30/07/2007 06:08:26 Originally by: Great Artista Originally by: d026 Originally by: Boma Airaken Verone wins EvE. That is all. so the only guy here bashing alliance warfare (the whole point of eve) wins eve? Well I'm sorry, but Verone just wins. YES I am in v7. I was there 10h straight in that big fight last saturday. Im not whining, lag is same to everyone, either am I not blaming you people for bringing 400 man fleet there, thus causing the 3min delay in... everything. In the current system, only solution for taking over systems IS making massive fleets. It needs a total change, instances are not it. so whats then change then? also lagg is not an issue as long as you cant even logg in/load completely desync and cant load the system for 70mins... Well its not instances for sure prove it:) Its against the basic structure, which the game was built on; in Eve everything is connected. Massive fleefight keeps people off the belts, make some run for cover ect. sorry nothing is forever there needs to be change. especially if due to lack of game design the it gets completely unplayable every 2nd weekend.
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.30 06:20:00 - [40] Originally by: Great Artista I like the fact that people try to come up with ideas to solve the problem, but I think we all agree that this just wasnt it. we dont need utopic ideas. we need a solution fixing this game as soon as possible. instancing fleets for a couple of minutes for the duration of the fight imho is teh way to go. in 2-3 years if they rescripted the whole code they can remove them again:)
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.30 06:44:00 - [41] again for the people who don't have any common sense: Quote: Wait until the exchange into Revelations is complete and all the new coding, graphics, physics and optimization is complete before whining? how long? till 2009? Quote: More new hardware? More dynamic resource allocation to distribute the server's processing power more adequately to those areas of the game environment that are having issues? there istnt much to do except complete recoding eve on the very basic lvl. eve is allready runnign on ramdrives.. so i-o is at a complete max. redesigning the whole basic source would take ages imho! im not willing to wait that long. Quote: Realisation that CCP know there's an issue at times with performance, and that they're trying their hardest to overcome an ever-growing playerbase? Time? How much time? Playing a unplayable game till 2010? Quote: Remove killmails? That'd stop a big load of lag in fleet battles with so many mail deliveries... Good idea, but i dont think they have a huge influence on the server performance anyway. Quote: Oh no sorry, that'd prevent all the counterstrike migrants from declaring their leetness as they camp gates in their smartbombing capitals, or lead 200 man blobs in to shoot a control tower for five hours and declare how they "pwnt" their opposition. Stoopid dogmatism on how we should play the game. Quote: To be honest, it's irony defined : Bunch of people who want to win so badly and can't face the horror of loss that they get the most MASSIVE blob of players they can. In response their opponent says "omg moar damage!" and fields 150% their numbers. Everyone jumps in, shock horror the server has a brainfart! Nodes die, babies cry, raptor jesus curses everyone, mission runners in Jita lose their CNR's to a Gursitas Arrogator because of a Tsunami of lag and node drops. Cue massive whining on Eve-O about how CCP suck and their crap servers are killing the game, when in fact it's the 500 people too scared about losing a fight out in the middle of nowhere that have caused the issue. Whining about whining and more dogmatism. Quote: If CCP makes fleets stable, people will just think "OMG NOW WE CAN BLOB WITH MOAR PEOPLEZ! TEH SURVUR CAN HANDLE ANOTHAR 500 ON GRID!11ONE DEPLOY TEH TITAN!11" If there is a limit player/node/instance this wont happen. Quote: Maybe you could all just stop blobbing? Ever thought of that? Attempt to appeal to good conciseness which always fails. We play this game to "win" and exploit every opportunity to do so. If we trough this crash the servers there need to be game changes NOW! Quote: Oh no wait... just come to the Eve-Online forums instead, which incidentally are hosted on the SAME SERVER CLUSTER, and contribute even more to the lag and instability by whining how much CCP apparently suck, while failing to remember that without them, you wouldn't even know what the hell a Sensor Booster II was. Not my fault how CCP hosts they're board. Again whine about a whine..
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.30 06:45:00 - [42] Originally by: Great Artista Originally by: d026 instancing fleets for a couple of minutes for the duration of the fight imho is teh way to go. What makes you think that everyone wants to take part in massive fleet fights, Im all comfy here, sitting on the POS in a system WE own. That is exactly the problem with instancing. Im not gonna move, you better come and get me. Unfortunatelly, you need 400 peeps to do that. because you had invited fallen souls, m-pire, fatal each alliance with tehyr won 100 man gang. Dont blame us for blobbing, its just how the game works..
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.30 08:07:00 - [43] Originally by: Gariuys Verone said it all... can't believe there's an actual discussion on this topic. Having a fight that prevents others from joining in that fight cause they're not part of the fight when it started is so completely against what EVE is, it's not even funny. Go play CS. sorry but right now the game/server/coding does not support this open end approach. if you fail to see this i'm not sure how we can help you.. but leaving the game unplayable as it is, is just not an option!
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.30 08:15:00 - [44] so anyway we have to reduce eves flexibility. if there is no limit on the nodes it will always come to overload. if we heavily force small gang combat and penalize large gangs for using more than 50/100(?) ships there is no place for the 3rd party aswell, due to the fact that the 3rd party would get penalized to hell. in the end, eve will never function properly without limitations to gang sizes. so either that or instancing. we cant have both, endless possibilities and stable performance.. at least not with the current eve coding/server architecture.
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.30 08:18:00 - [45] Edited by: d026 on 30/07/2007 08:24:04 Originally by: Amarria Black Originally by: d026 Originally by: Gariuys Verone said it all... can't believe there's an actual discussion on this topic. Having a fight that prevents others from joining in that fight cause they're not part of the fight when it started is so completely against what EVE is, it's not even funny. Go play CS. sorry but right now the game/server/coding does not support this open end approach. if you fail to see this i'm not sure how we can help you.. but leaving the game unplayable as it is, is just not an option! Sorry, but right now blobbing is not required for overall gameplay, you just insist upon doing it. If you fail to see this, I'm not sure how we can help you, but bashing your head against a wall repeatedly and demanding CCP put in padding is just not an option. sorry we dont have to argue this. blobbign is fact! either ccp implements means to prevent blobbing or it will occur no matter what. And as long as it its possible to blobb i expect CCP to be able to deliver a node where its possible to fight. Especially if per game design its often needed to blobb (eg taking out a pos).
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.30 08:28:00 - [46] Edited by: d026 on 30/07/2007 08:29:50 Originally by: Jessica Lorelei no to private instancing yes to fixing lag yes to fixing the blob problem, prefereably with more support for individual ship roles and tactics. NO TO SLEEPING WITH VERONE, get out of his pants damnit lol. anyway what i don't get... if we fix the blob, it will keep much more people off the fight than a private instance:9 and if you check Sniper Kalahari suggestions, the instances dont have to be private at all..
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.30 08:33:00 - [47] Edited by: d026 on 30/07/2007 08:33:52 Originally by: Jessica Lorelei large fleets doesn't have to equal blob. watch films about space battles, they don't blob each other they use battle tactics. all we see in eve is concentrating fire, its not exactly fun. thats completely not my issue. i dont care about concentrated fire. i care about beeing able to logg in and have a fight rather than getting lagged out/desynced/kicked off the server. anyway destroy the blobb means to reduce its size because the server cant handle 400 people on the same grid shooting each other. if we have fixed the rudimentary basic stuff we can go on and talk about tactics and stuff and how fights could be more fun for everybody:)
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.30 08:34:00 - [48] Originally by: Crumplecorn Verone is Win. and you are Lose:)
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.30 08:41:00 - [49] Originally by: Jessica Lorelei Originally by: Crumplecorn Verone is Win. sycophant lets make a beat out of him:O
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.30 10:56:00 - [50] Originally by: Dr Slaughter Originally by: Aridia Parker Maybe a solution would be a functionality reduction along with the number of ships in the same grid. What, like, when the average grid cpu load of the last 2 minutes >= 95%, damage in that grid is turned off? When avr. grid cpu load (2 mins) >= 99% all drones are returned to cargo and ships are randomly translocated (in groups of 20) to systems in neigbouring nodes... Personally I wish when a node can't 'take it anymore' they would simply disable damage (so no petitions needed) and allow us to re-locate our ships back to 1 of 3 nominated fall-back locations. oh, and fix desync.. obviously :) no what he meant was something like that the server only calculates the damage for one turret/ship then multiply this ammount by fitted guns/ship for example..
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.30 15:05:00 - [51] Originally by: Ovno ConSyquence Originally by: Dr Slaughter Really we should just stop blobbing and fix it ourselves but it's too tempting to sit looking at the login prompt isn't it? I've always thought asking us to stop blobbing is like asking us to bring knives to a gun fight... I mean why would anyone ever want to not bring the most effective force they have to the battle? It's just bad tactics.... you are completely right. nobody is ver going to stop blobbing. especially while defending a system. i mean if you can field 400 ships you are guaranteed to keep the system by lagging out the attackers who have to jump in first...

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.