EVE Search - Lag and the battles it wins

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Corporation, Alliance and Organization Discussions

Lag and the battles it wins

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Erotic Irony 0bsession	Posted - 2007.09.09 02:26:00 - [31] Originally by: Ramlir Originally by: Lord WarATron How would trolling the forums make the game easier, unless you concede that trolling disproportionatety helps one side? You didn't understand what he said so you repeated his post. Never would have expected that from the intellectual superpower, 'Lord WarATron'. He used to be ascn its ok, he's in good company like stk and corm Originally by: unhealthyman Originally by: Lord WarATron How would trolling the forums make the game easier, unless you concede that trolling disproportionatety helps one side? And who says goons have a monopoly on clogging up the forums with offtopic flames? You said holding space isn't meant to be easy - sure that's fine. But lag isn't an intentional difficulty level, it is an unintentional aspect of the game that makes it unplayable and unenjoyable. Anyone who claims lag as a fun 'feature' is truly deluded. I think what he means to say is: lol, DONT YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT Eve HISTORY? ___ Junkie Beverage: i use your tears to cyno in my laughter
Blazde 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.09.09 03:37:00 - [32] Thought about this a fair bit since the 750 man BKG battle this week. It went like so: - Everyone on one gate (like you do) - Some still loading after jumping through it, for the most part not visible to anyone who was loaded - For over 45 minutes the battle 'raged' but only about 10-15 people on each side died - I was primaried several times but managed to warp after 30-60 seconds while only 2-3 people were actually shooting me - Shooting people was much much harder than warping, just locking people took 3-4 minutes. So far so good imo, the status quo was being maintained and few ships were being lost. The defenders had a starbase exit rf mode, which I believe they charged during the battle. We had higher numbers (but no caps) and it could be argued with zero lag we'd have broken the camp and finished the starbase. So that's one way lag affects wars. But I don't mind a defender having a 'status quo' advantage in such situations where they're able to summon enough ships to lag out the system. It makes sense, they deserve it. If a superblob situation continues night after night, sooner or later enough people get sick of it and don't turn up that some action can actually take place. It's just another aspect of the attrition war, it's boring in a sense, but then sov warfare is. So is mining. So is farming. But it's all part of the high-level gameplay which in it's entirety is exciting. I suspect the devs are already tweaking things in this direction. It was striking how much easier it was to warp than to lock. I warped to starbases and back out without ever loading anything. At one point I tried repeatedly to release drones (so sue me ) but they never came out in the 15 minutes before I warped. If warp really does take priority over offensive actions then that's a pretty good thing. There's precedent for this kind of lag-management game mechanic. When you warp into a 50 man hostile blob and it takes 5-10 seconds to load, your ship remains unlockable for a while or until you move so you don't get insta-popped without seeing it. We stay cloaked after jumping gates because it can take a long time to load. With enough feedback from players hopefully the same philosophy can be applied to fleet battle situations. The major problems currently are that starbase and drone ai are relatively unaffected by lag. The only time I nearly didn't make it out was when a ton of fighters started on me. Had the battle taken place at a well armed starbase it wouldn't have lasted 10 minutes. And I think a doomsday may have disturbed the deadlock in an unfair way too, since warping in 15 seconds just wasn't possible. After 45 minutes of slow-mo battle in BKG the node died and that's when things went whacky. For whatever reason our side got more people back in quicker (partly we had more people to begin with, partly our FCs seemed more experienced at ordering an immediate relog and instructed everyone how to get the best from the black screen). We got control of the gate and as more people got in our firepower increased, while the enemy were drip-fed into our guns. We slaughtered 10 caps and incapacitated the jammer before they had recovered and regrouped. Most of us agreed it was a hollow victory, regardless of what may or may not have happened in a lag-free situation. There's been a lot of percieved unfairness in previous high profile node death situations. So it seems they're the real culprit in seriously affecting wars, not lag itself which merely makes everything slow and boring for everyone. _
Bethy Chan Caldari White Nova Industries R i s e	Posted - 2007.09.09 06:49:00 - [33] fleet laggfare is in a sorry state atm its literally killing ppls will to join in and killing alliances that have been around for a while. there is just to many things that are getting added instead of things getting upgraded imo. As it is now i think CCP wants is to go back to the old days(IRL) :D, instead of a big battle each side should produce their strongest alliance member and they deul for their fleets fate
Icomeinpeace Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.09.09 06:55:00 - [34] U don't really need ppl to scramble in fleet fights since you can't warp out anyway. I had givin up on keeping a mean kill/death ratio a long time ago, we just gotta live with lag and hope ccp can sort it later. Still a fun game though, but would be epic if it ran smoothly with houndreds of ppl.
Blake O'Reilly	Posted - 2007.09.09 07:36:00 - [35] Originally by: Dagam Edited by: Dagam on 08/09/2007 15:41:39 Lag affects everyone and it's in everyone's interest (not just high-SP players or low-SP players) to eliminate it. In this thread we had a proposal to lower the number of fighters but keep the dps the same in order to reduce lag in fleet fights but apparently some BoB members think this is unreasonable. Can we merge T1 frigates giving them the same DPS and reduce the lag in fleet fights? EvE needs some major help in fleet fights, but you will have to excuse me if I take with a grain of salt anything proposed to reduce lag by an alliance who has done nothing but use it as a weapon for over a year now.
dastommy79 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2007.09.09 07:49:00 - [36] Originally by: Icomeinpeace U don't really need ppl to scramble in fleet fights since you can't warp out anyway. I had givin up on keeping a mean kill/death ratio a long time ago, we just gotta live with lag and hope ccp can sort it later. Still a fun game though, but would be epic if it ran smoothly with houndreds of ppl. I agree with a BOB guy. Did hell frezze over? Seriously we all know there are limits to what the server can do. Yet we continue to push it to the limit and then complain to CCP that its broken. We need to learn how to adapt to the enviorment we are in and survive. EVE darwinism FTW I driks alots
Syath Caldari Einherjar Rising	Posted - 2007.09.09 08:06:00 - [37] sometimes i wonder who leads these alliances... a bunch of newbs methinks. THe plain fact of the matter is if u have 600-700 people why not spread them out over multiple systems, instead of losing 1 intense battle why not lose 1 and win 2 others, seriously people lets play eve smarter.
Scavok GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.09.09 08:08:00 - [38] Originally by: Icomeinpeace U don't really need ppl to scramble in fleet fights since you can't warp out anyway. This is true, but if the game has reached the point where we have to tell newbies to get out so the people with bigger guns can play, then the game has clearly reached it's player limit and ccp is in a really bad position.
dastommy79 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2007.09.09 08:13:00 - [39] Originally by: Scavok Originally by: Icomeinpeace U don't really need ppl to scramble in fleet fights since you can't warp out anyway. This is true, but if the game has reached the point where we have to tell newbies to get out so the people with bigger guns can play, then the game has clearly reached it's player limit and ccp is in a really bad position. This is also a very good argument. Kinda puts ccp in a bind. They want to include the lower sp characters into productive fleet members but they also have limits to what the server can handle. Its been a big issue for a long time now and i think they will find away to resolve it. CCP i believe in you!!!!!!!!!!!!! I driks alots
bsspewer Caldari Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2007.09.09 08:16:00 - [40] I completely agree. CCP has a few options: fix it so the clients require basic information about the situation happening (i don't care if my buddy just signed on, I DON'T need to see his photo rendered), or create an environment that causes battles to be decided on skill and strategy rather then alpha strike power.

Lord WarATron Amarr Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.09.09 08:25:00 - [41] Edited by: Lord WarATron on 09/09/2007 08:29:01 Originally by: unhealthyman You said holding space isn't meant to be easy - sure that's fine. But lag isn't an intentional difficulty level, it is an unintentional aspect of the game that makes it unplayable and unenjoyable. Anyone who claims lag as a fun 'feature' is truly deluded. Lag is never a intentional Difficulty level, and I have never implyed it was a fun feature. It is like the weather. You cannot control it but you can prepare for it, remain calm in it. Anyone who drives a car like its the summer during hard snow and rain can blame external issues all he wants, but unless he prepars for it, he will fail. Your friend failed to read my post about preparing for this and came out with the usual "lag effects one side" fishing pandora, as if we have some kind of magic button to make us lag immune. Like I said, eve lagfests tend to be around 0.01% of eve pvp, though it causes 99.99% of the problems. Other than that, eve is a very lag free game for pvp almost all of the time. Fixing lag would be a godsend and welcomed, but until it is fixed, you have to accept that it exists. If you dont understand that, and do not wish to prepare for the serious rough issues when you are operating at the extreme of what the servers operate, then there is not much more that can be said. -- Billion Isk Mission
torN Deception GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.09.09 10:18:00 - [42] Edited by: torN Deception on 09/09/2007 10:18:41 Originally by: Lord WarATron How would trolling the forums make the game easier, unless you concede that trolling disproportionatety helps one side? If your attempts to avoid the question are as artless as that, best to just disappear from the thread and go back to trolling on an alt. You said that removing lag would make the game easier, specifically you said that it would make the game easier to an IAC poster. If lag affected BoB&pets as much as it did its opponents(who include IAC and RSF among others), removing lag would not make the game easier or harder for either side. But that's not what you said, you said fixing lag would make the 0.0 fleet game easier for IAC. If goons and their allies(including IAC) were benefiting from lag, fixing the lag problem would make the game harder for them. Conversely, fixing the lag would make the game more difficult for them if it was BoB who was benefiting from lag. And as you've so helpfully pointed out, it's the latter case at present. Now, I'm not saying that BoB is intentionally creating lag, or at least employing tactics designed solely to increase lag. They could be, but I'm not going to speculate on whether or not BoB's advantage due to lag is the result of overt exploiting of the problem or simply the unintentional side effect of their tactics.
Darcuese Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.09.09 11:24:00 - [43] Edited by: Darcuese on 09/09/2007 11:30:34 territory issue is, IMO, problem of blobs->ergo lag. If there is a gang flying around it might meat opponent (homeland-defending) gang to fight with. Ofc, if defending side dont wanna fight, it will rather wait for attacking gang to pass by if there isnt some ganking on the way. So, if defending side dont wanna fight, no much harm atacking gang (even fleet) can do to them. Only way to make harm is killing poses (to take soveregnity and station) which require larger number then normal. Losing poses (soveregnity) defending side dont wanna experience, so they need to bring out big number themself to hold the position. Combine that with Pos structure and drones/fighters on grid, there is no way to have lag free combat in this scenario. Everything outside of pos attacking/defending is playable. So, there are 2 things CCP might do. Some technical issue which i doubt will be done in near future or to change style of playing for large parties as alliances. Removing stuff involving pos wars is easier then technical solution, IMO. Like the other night in FAT when all started cause of IAC mothership in space. There wasnt fighting near POS (at least i cant recall). And even though the fight was laggy, i experienced lot laggier fights that that one. I wonder if that fight wouuld be laggy as it was, if some other things would be changed...things i mentioned above....im not sure about it me, myself and I ------>
GateGuy	Posted - 2007.09.09 11:26:00 - [44] Edited by: GateGuy on 09/09/2007 11:27:35 Dude this is the biggest crap i ever read i didnt use to but just cause of this dumb answer i will start to believe the "bob has ccp inside". Originally by: Lord WarATron Alliance Warfare is the extreme end of eve, not suitible for everyone. As some forum posts arent suitable for everyone. As this isnt for you. Originally by: Lord WarATron Those lagfests represent 0.01% of eve pvp, but probebly cause 99.99% of the issues you mention. Hes talking about big fleet battles 'amigo'. Make statistcs about that. is that 0.01% lagged on big fleet battles for you? then you have ccp helping you on bandwidth? geez. Originally by: Lord WarATron Eve pvp is very very lagfree, just charge your alt into lowsec or npc 0.0 and you will get the types of pvp you want. WTS dipers for you. Originally by: Lord WarATron There will always be the "Terrain" issues, since a good general plans for bad weather. A alliance fleet pilot needs to know that since he is on the extreme end of what the servers can handle, which means you need to know you will have massive 30min+ lag, you will get desynced, you will die before grid loads etc. Ye blame the poor generals, or subscribers, who forgot to read that line in the EVE contract "You will LOOSE your sihps due to LAG if local +200. Dude. youre ridiculous. EDIT: Is this trolling? Cause i feel so sorry about those friends who loose dreads and carriers without even having the chance to lock anything, or turn hardeners on.
EVIL SYNNs Minmatar The Illuminati. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.09.09 11:43:00 - [45] I don't get this 500 v 500 mentality. Let me just explain. My alliance has just put a system full of POS's into reinforced. The defenders move in and wait for me to come back to finish the job. uh oh. Forget that. I would head as far away from there as possible (cause you know they are there) and hit another system or even 2 before they can get their logistics together to come and fight. And repeat until the defenders are looking after 5 systems and you have free regin. POS stront timings give the advantage to the defender, but also forces their hand. So stop the blob and go and kill 2 different systems at the same time. You know their defence is busy. imho NO SIG REQURIED
sophisticatedlimabean Gallente The Illuminati.	Posted - 2007.09.09 11:59:00 - [46] Perhaps having a war setting on the exit menu that you can use when it loooks like your goi9ng into a large laggy fight. We all proly reduce our settings to help with the lag but im sure the guys at ccp can come up with a tab to click on that reduces everything ingame to its bartest minimum and reduces the load that we have to process in huge fleet ops. This way ppl who evjoy uber graphics do not need to use it but those of us who engage in large fleet ops can actualy see our screens move now and again.
Vile rat GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.09.09 12:28:00 - [47] Originally by: EVIL SYNNs I don't get this 500 v 500 mentality. Let me just explain. My alliance has just put a system full of POS's into reinforced. The defenders move in and wait for me to come back to finish the job. uh oh. Forget that. I would head as far away from there as possible (cause you know they are there) and hit another system or even 2 before they can get their logistics together to come and fight. And repeat until the defenders are looking after 5 systems and you have free regin. POS stront timings give the advantage to the defender, but also forces their hand. So stop the blob and go and kill 2 different systems at the same time. You know their defence is busy. imho But a talented logistics director can thwart this pretty good by setting stront properly so nothing comes out at the same time. It really does not work all that well in practice.
Yazoul Samaiel Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.09.09 13:56:00 - [48] The main problem with lag in eve is server load and i dont mean number of ppl connectedd , i mean the number of ppl requiring server operations and calulations from the server . Compare jita 600 ppl and lets say anyother big fight in 0.0 with 500 ppl even , the amount of computaion done here is exponential in comparison and back in the days b4 finaly ccp got the sense of adding WTZ and ppl got rid of their 10 k bm folders the game became more playable . As a result now the big fights we get 600 and 700 and more per system to now CCP are forced to penalise the blob or ofc buy some sort of a non existing hardware than handle 600 ppl in a system actualy doing something unlike ppl loitering in jita. Peanlising blobs can come in many many ways for instance multipling the dmg from a titan DD depnding of the multiple of hostile numbers. Blob penalised on warp in , meaning they never warp in the same point due to warp interferace so they end up spread over the grid . Huge lock time and low sig radius for small gangs vs blobbed opponenets . Tbh if any of those penalities do get applied ppl will think 1000 times b4 saying " yeppeeeee lets make and 400 man gang and go lag out the system with our I-win button " this goes for all alliances tbh not just one entity since the result is a slideshow and 1 fps and you either find urself dysnched , spawned in a staion or just loaded after the fight is over . All these outcomes realy ruin the whole point of fleet fights and till there is some sort of restriction it will always be the same.
Flow Befort GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.09.09 15:00:00 - [49] Originally by: Yazoul Samaiel The main problem with lag in eve is server load and i dont mean number of ppl connectedd , i mean the number of ppl requiring server operations and calulations from the server . Compare jita 600 ppl and lets say anyother big fight in 0.0 with 500 ppl even , the amount of computaion done here is exponential in comparison and back in the days b4 finaly ccp got the sense of adding WTZ and ppl got rid of their 10 k bm folders the game became more playable . As a result now the big fights we get 600 and 700 and more per system to now CCP are forced to penalise the blob or ofc buy some sort of a non existing hardware than handle 600 ppl in a system actualy doing something unlike ppl loitering in jita. Peanlising blobs can come in many many ways for instance multipling the dmg from a titan DD depnding of the multiple of hostile numbers. Blob penalised on warp in , meaning they never warp in the same point due to warp interferace so they end up spread over the grid . Huge lock time and low sig radius for small gangs vs blobbed opponenets . Tbh if any of those penalities do get applied ppl will think 1000 times b4 saying " yeppeeeee lets make and 400 man gang and go lag out the system with our I-win button " this goes for all alliances tbh not just one entity since the result is a slideshow and 1 fps and you either find urself dysnched , spawned in a staion or just loaded after the fight is over . All these outcomes realy ruin the whole point of fleet fights and till there is some sort of restriction it will always be the same. furthermore,
Greme Amarr Slacker Industries Exuro Mortis	Posted - 2007.09.09 15:02:00 - [50] I can just see the next batch of PR marketing getting around the lag issue. Eve:Online - Now with bullet time!

Dalanoria Northern Intelligence Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2007.09.09 15:41:00 - [51] Has a server even been invented that can handle 600 clients or even 200 without lag ?
Fitz Chivalry eXceed Inc. INVICTUS.	Posted - 2007.09.09 17:08:00 - [52] Edited by: Fitz Chivalry on 09/09/2007 17:12:09 Originally by: BuIIseye Tbh the lag is just a failed CCP feature to make fleet combat more intense thru "slow motion" action. Apparently Oveur was playing Max Payne and thought now that would be cool for eve, watching your ammo fly in Projectile TimeÖ, they are still working on the coding to get it exactly right however, but it is coming soonÖ edit - i cant believe i made the same point as a guy from EM :( On topic - the funniest thing about these really lagged out battles as we had in MJ- on Friday night is arguing whether the 5 people that can see people there firing are desynced and seeing people that warped out ages ago or are seeing people actually there, or even peple that have not even warped in yet but are having a glimpse into the future!"!
Dal Thrax Multiverse Corporation	Posted - 2007.09.09 18:23:00 - [53] Originally by: Syath sometimes i wonder who leads these alliances... a bunch of newbs methinks. THe plain fact of the matter is if u have 600-700 people why not spread them out over multiple systems, instead of losing 1 intense battle why not lose 1 and win 2 others, seriously people lets play eve smarter. Because current POS mechanics allow exits from reinforced to be staggered over time so that all the defenders fire power can be brought to the defense of one POS (or at worst one systems worth of POS's). If there where less option as to the timing of reinforced modes so that multiple POS would have to come out at the same time then we might see attacks over several systems. Dal Originally by: Seleene It seems to me that 'independence' is a relative term these days, determined mainly by the size and number of your guns.
Drebble Gallente S-44	Posted - 2007.09.09 19:48:00 - [54] Actually the idea to scale game time in response to loads sounds very interesting. I'd rather play smoothly at a reduced time scale than look at a black screen and wait for my ship to pop. The level of slowdown would have to be clearly displayed on the screen of course, so that one can play accordingly. Bring too many ships and the problem is back of course, with time scaling that puts module activation at hour+ intervals, but at least you push the playable fleet size upwards a notch from what we have today. At the very least an interesting idea. //Drebble
Vehestian Killson Corp Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.09.10 08:50:00 - [55] Originally by: Drebble Actually the idea to scale game time in response to loads sounds very interesting. I'd rather play smoothly at a reduced time scale than look at a black screen and wait for my ship to pop. The level of slowdown would have to be clearly displayed on the screen of course, so that one can play accordingly. Bring too many ships and the problem is back of course, with time scaling that puts module activation at hour+ intervals, but at least you push the playable fleet size upwards a notch from what we have today. At the very least an interesting idea. //Drebble so in effect: warp in, activate modules, go to store, buy beer, come back, open beer and sit down just as modules activate. the IAC button! On topic...loading...loading...loading...loading... We who are about to lag salut you! 0/
Silvestri Umbra Congregatio Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.09.10 13:03:00 - [56] I ain't falling for no banana in the tailpipe!!!! -Eddie Murphy
MarKand M. Corp M. PIRE	Posted - 2007.09.10 14:08:00 - [57] Intressting subject, and probebly a much more complex question then just add hardware. For example, during the BKG fight we were +700 in local, same time there was I am sure a few more big battles around, in the size of 300-500 in local. So pure PvP alliance warfare is occupying 3500-5000 players, of 35000 people online. That makes our problems to be 10-20% of the active playerbase in eve. Mr Yosmael from BNC ( will have to edit that name later) is addressing the true problem I believe. When we are fighting, the same node is bissy calculating thousands of market searches, ore calculations, refing, jumps, mining, building, research and so on and so on and so on. And our blobbing then does not just hits us, it hits everyone on that node. One solution would be to have more dedicated nodes for hostile/blobbed space. But adding more expensive hardware to create more serverpower for a smaller part of the playerbase would probebly lead to a higher monthly fee. Ofc I am not happy, and I dont think CCP is happy either, but I think sometimes we who are PvP:ing in these very and actually UNIQE large battles forgett the sheer total amount of data being transfered. So I think well have to wait a little bit more, for CCP to make more money, or for eve to get more subsribers ( mo money again :) ) Well, just my 2 cents Have a nice day. /M
goodby4u Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.09.10 14:26:00 - [58] This is what happens,as fleet battles grow in size due to their affectiveness,the systems their in strain and cannot hold everybody so it just becomes a hinderence...Funny thing is this is appearently the best reducer for blobbing...Not the titan or stealth bomber __________________________________________ Yes it is great being amarr. I am minmatar,fly amarr,use gellente drones and am in caldari space.
Yakoff Star Scream Inc. Ultima Rati0	Posted - 2007.09.10 15:31:00 - [59] Originally by: BuIIseye Tbh the lag is just a failed CCP feature to make fleet combat more intense thru "slow motion" action. Too bad it didn't worked So you are saying Fleet PVP in EVE is like watching 300.
Vodka Neat Vendetta Underground Rule of Three	Posted - 2007.09.10 19:20:00 - [60] I think that putting a hard cap would be great if they could do the following in any reasonable way: 1. You have to figure out who is vs who since most lagfests are multi alliance super blobs. This is the main hurdle how to automate it so that the server knows this group is on one side and the other group is against them. 2. Gain some benefit from having backup in the next system or "nearby" systems For those that say that then only high skilled fleets would be able to accomplish anything. Think multiple fronts. Fine they win that system but they lose 2 others at the same time! If you have enough numbers advantage to win vs skill you have enough numbers to attack multiple systems and they can't be everywhere at once. Why are you still reading? Its over. Continue to the next post.



Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.