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

---

Originally by: R3dSh1ft

---

All these calculations are being done server side (trajectory, damage multipliers including skills, gang bonus to shield, resistance calculation, now multiply that by 8 for each turret, and multiply it 200 times again for the number shooting, and then add the fact that each person there has to see whats going on all the time - the amount of computational power thats being utilised is just unreal.

---

Originally by: RuleoftheBone

---

-Eliminate super-caps from game. Period.
-Eliminate POS-based sov rules and the associated sov-based cake and cookie structures.
-Introduce a new BB-class ship that features the jump portal generator with a max of 25-50 ships pass-thru per portal generated.
-Eliminate Empire-0.0 chokepoints by opening up the map and/or using exploration-based "hidden" star gates .
-Eliminate static bubbles.
-And so on to open up the game

Sounds like fun to me. It won't happen due to too many pilots/alliances having too much invested in pixels...errr....I meant alliance infrastructure...but oh the possibilities .

---

Originally by: R3dSh1ft

---

All these calculations are being done server side (trajectory, damage multipliers including skills, gang bonus to shield, resistance calculation, now multiply that by 8 for each turret, and multiply it 200 times again for the number shooting, and then add the fact that each person there has to see whats going on all the time - the amount of computational power thats being utilised is just unreal.

---

Originally by: Gutsani

---

there is this drop down box on the login screen, select serentiy. onoes! its a instant pvp server

---

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.

---

Originally by: Verone

---

ahahahahahahaha

Instances...

---

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.

---

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.

---

Originally by: Verone

---

ahahahahahahaha

Instances...

---

Originally by: Raevenor

---

D026, shut up you don't know what the ****. Instances are not the answer.

---

Originally by: d026

---

Originally by: Verone

---

ahahahahahahaha

Instances...

---

got a better solution?

---

Originally by: d026

---

Originally by: Verone

---

ahahahahahahaha

Instances...

---

got a better solution?

---

Originally by: Verone

---

Maybe you could all just stop blobbing? Ever thought of that?

---

Originally by: Verone

---

Maybe you could all just stop blobbing? Ever thought of that?

---

Originally by: Verone

---

Maybe you could all just stop blobbing? Ever thought of that?

---

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!

---

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.

---

Originally by: Verone

---

Wait until the exchange into Revelations is complete and all the new coding, graphics, physics and optimization is complete before whining?

---

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.

---

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.

---

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"

---

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.

---

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:)

---

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.

---

Originally by: Verone

---

Sorry, but that's not Eve, it just doesn't cut the mustard.

---

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.

---

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..

---

Originally by: d026

---

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..

---

Originally by: Price Watcher

---

Originally by: Verone

---

ahahahahahahaha

Instances...

---

Verone! You old pie-rat! Nice to see you're still active.

---

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.

---

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).

---

Originally by: Verone

---

Remove killmails? That'd stop a big load of lag in fleet battles with so many mail deliveries... 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.

---

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.

---

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.

---

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.

---

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.

---

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.

---

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...

---

Originally by: Verone

---

Coupled with that, it would destroy the level of interaction that makes Eve the game it is.

---

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.

---

Originally by: d026

---

Please accept the fact that right now there is often NO INTERACTION at all due to server side limitations..

---

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).

---

Originally by: d026

---

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!

---

Originally by: d026

---

ok mate, lets work on a solution other than ionstancing then. im open to suggestions:)

---

Originally by: Miki Fin

---

Originally by: d026

---

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!

---

If eve is really that bad, why play?

---

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.

---

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.

---

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.

---

Originally by: d026

---

i mean if i want to take down (or destroy) this outpost, why should i fields 50 people instead of 500?

---

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.

---

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?

---

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.
------------
ULTIMATE LAG SOLUTION | Forum Whiners - Unite!

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?

---

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.

Originally by: d026

---

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..

---

Originally by: d026

---

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.

---

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.

---

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..

---

Originally by: d026

---

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:)

---

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??

---

Originally by: Verone

---

I'm all for killing the blob.

Instancing is never the answer.

---

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?

---

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.

---

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

---

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.

---

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.

---

Originally by: d026

---

Originally by: Sniper Kalahari

---

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:)

---

Originally by: Tarminic

---

Originally by: d026
thats is quite my point:)[/quote

---

And while that would be nice, it won't happen because it would require two separate servers (one for the "instance" and one for the system) to constantly share all their player memory for purposes such at local chat. This would put a large enough strain on the network infrastructure that you would likely lose any gains made by dedicating a single server to a battle. To the absolute best of my knowledge (and I've researched this a bit actually), there is really no effective way to split load processing of a single system or battle across multiple nodes.

---

I dont see another way tbh...The fact is that the current system has a single process running a system. This IS the bottleneck. Doesnt mean we cant beef the databases or network, but your single point of failure is having a 1:1 between a solar system and the process which runs it. Worse is that CCP chose to host multiple solar systems on a single physical machine. This is obviously done for financial reasons, as for the majority of time these systems are empty in deep 0.0 and other places. I can tell you something, changing this architecture will be expensive and time consuming. This leads to the effect we are seeing where the smallest atomic unit of code (the solar system) is hitting a wall in performance because it cannot scale up any further (jita) or because they cannot predict where the load is going to be (0.0 fleet battles). The other way to look at this is how a bunch of people on the forum do, which is looking for potential performance increases in areas of the architecture i.e refactoring for performance. This will never give you the same level of benefits a change in architecture would, and will always be costly.

To answer your questions specifically...

@d026 - A major lift in performance for not much cost (relatively) is always always worth it.

@tarminic - I guess we both dont know, but I believe its fairly unlikely that the network (the one which connects the servers together) is the bottleneck. Doubtful. I would also think that the traffic between servers could be minimised. What exactly would they have to talk about? chat channels? big deal.

Originally by: Sniper Kalahari

---

I guess we both dont know, but I believe its fairly unlikely that the network (the one which connects the servers together) is the bottleneck. Doubtful. I would also think that the traffic between servers could be minimised. What exactly would they have to talk about? chat channels? big deal.

---

Originally by: General Apocalypse

---

Originally by: RuleoftheBone

---

-Eliminate super-caps from game. Period.
-Eliminate POS-based sov rules and the associated sov-based cake and cookie structures.
-Introduce a new BB-class ship that features the jump portal generator with a max of 25-50 ships pass-thru per portal generated.
-Eliminate Empire-0.0 chokepoints by opening up the map and/or using exploration-based "hidden" star gates .
-Eliminate static bubbles.
-And so on to open up the game

Sounds like fun to me. It won't happen due to too many pilots/alliances having too much invested in pixels...errr....I meant alliance infrastructure...but oh the possibilities .

---

New to EVE huh ? Got 3 words for you QTF

---

Originally by: Cregi

---

So what would fleet fights be over? would each instance be owned by someone? Say your fleet is going after a sov system would said system be taken out of regular eve and moved to the instance? How would SOV war work with your instance idea?

---

Originally by: KenDoll

---

i wonder if with more programmers and some wizkid server guys ccp could come up with some sort of active monitoring program that would track large clusters of players moving through the solar system to shift server resource's on the fly to cope, tracking large groups of players as they move through gates to there eventual destination whilst stealing resources from empty area's.

im no programmer so dont lnych me if this is rediculous.

---

Originally by: Verone

---

lots of 'wait and be patient.. CCP is trying.'

---

Quote:

---

Remove killmails? That'd stop a big load of lag in fleet battles with so many mail deliveries...

---

Quote:

---

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.

---

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.

---

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?:)

---

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.

---

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.

---

Originally by: Mr Friendly

---

the odd bit about Eve is so many of us respond to lag threads by saying, 'OMG, noob..STFU and go back to WoW, you stupid NightElf!!!Elentyone!'.

Stop for a moment and stop defending CCP. They make a great game, but ... seriously... it lags A LOT. At least acknowledge it, and stop calling newbies idiots for coming to Eve and expecting a lag-free game. Sheesh... what did they expect after all? A smooth gaming experience? LOL NOOB

The fact that other games do it has nothing to do with expectations about Eve accomplishing the same.. oh no... that would be silly.

That we bring the Blob to combat a POS is how CCP has engineered the game. If the server cannot handle the game when it runs according to how the game is engineered, we should not be defending the intent\ of CCP, but demanding they make good on their promises. No one made CCP structure the game so blobs and major fleet battles are the easiest ways ways to accomplish the mechanics CCP has put in place.

Don't blame the players... we just play the game someone else made. And we pay for it every month.

---

Originally by: Verone

---

Wait until the exchange into Revelations is complete and all the new coding, graphics, physics and optimization is complete before whining?

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?

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?

Remove killmails? That'd stop a big load of lag in fleet battles with so many mail deliveries... 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.


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.

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"

Rinse and repeat cycle.

Maybe you could all just stop blobbing? Ever thought of that?

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.

Alliance warfare never ceases to amuse me. It's like watching someone play Lemmings

---

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)?

---

Originally by: Boma Airaken

---

Verone wins EvE. That is all.

---

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?

---

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

---

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"

---

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.

---

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:)

---

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.

---

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.

---

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.

---

Originally by: d026

---

instancing fleets for a couple of minutes for the duration of the fight imho is teh way to go.

---

Quote:

---

Wait until the exchange into Revelations is complete and all the new coding, graphics, physics and optimization is complete before whining?

---

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?

---

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?

---

Quote:

---

Remove killmails? That'd stop a big load of lag in fleet battles with so many mail deliveries...

---

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.

---

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.

---

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"

---

Quote:

---

Maybe you could all just stop blobbing? Ever thought of that?

---

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.

---

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.

---

Originally by: d026

---

because you had invited fallen souls, m-pire, fatal each alliance with tehyr won 100 man gang.

---

Quote:

---

Dont blame us for blobbing, its just how the game works..

---

Originally by: Verone

---

Sorry, but that's not Eve, CCP just doesn't cut the mustard.

---

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.

---

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!

---

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.

---

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.

---

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.

---

Originally by: Crumplecorn

---

Verone is Win.

---

Originally by: Crumplecorn

---

Verone is Win.

---

Originally by: Jessica Lorelei

---

Originally by: Crumplecorn

---

Verone is Win.

---

sycophant

---

Originally by: Aridia Parker

---

Maybe a solution would be a functionality reduction along with the number of ships in the same grid.

---

Originally by: fire 59

---

Arguing with stupid people is like trying to bite your own elbow.

---

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 :)

---

Originally by: Ovno ConSyquence

---

Right, 1st off i gave up after the second page so i don't know if this has been suggested yet....

Rather than complex instanceing etc... which could change the way the game works, would it not be better to just be able to ask the devs to move a system/constelation/region to a more powerful node for the duration of a war, so that when you know there are going to be large battles there over the next couple of weeks the devs can vbe prepaired and assign more resources at the next downtime?

I admit its not as quick and adaptable but it would mean that any large campaigns had it a lot better than they do now....

---

Originally by: fire 59

---

Arguing with stupid people is like trying to bite your own elbow.

---

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?

---

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....

---