EVE Search - CCP, please make your game playable...

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

CCP, please make your game playable...

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Thanos Draicon	Posted - 2007.09.15 00:54:00 - [31] Originally by: CharlieMurphy Edited by: CharlieMurphy on 15/09/2007 00:47:32 CS isnt advertised as massively multiplayer nor does it require a subscription to play So where do they say on the EVE box that you can play 150 vs. 150 battles without lag?
fuze	Posted - 2007.09.15 01:00:00 - [32] Originally by: Erlik Draknor ...and hire people to fix the lag. Why don't you get it in your thick skull that CCP doesn't know how to fix the lag? They have been struggling with this for over 4 years so there is no magic algorithm of total and utter uberness that will go make the lag away. CCP created a game where the important stuff is handled client side per system(s) on a single node. So when that node is running at 100% all the people who come after that gets the royal pain of lag. Even if they can refine it in a way they can assign a grid to a single node you'd still cap out at some number of internet space ships. And even then if you could have something like hot nodes that can handle grid with over 200 peeps in it my guess would be CCP pretty much needs to rewrite their server side software which means you'd end up with Eve 2. So you basicly end up with: Lag, learn to die by it.
CharlieMurphy Amarr Viziam	Posted - 2007.09.15 01:08:00 - [33] Edited by: CharlieMurphy on 15/09/2007 01:12:01 Edited by: CharlieMurphy on 15/09/2007 01:10:05 Originally by: Thanos Draicon So where do they say on the EVE box that you can play 150 vs. 150 battles without lag? i never owned the eve box so i cant answer that im not complaining about lag, what im talking about is the game failing completely, leaving the players staring at a frozen screen here is a link that took me a couple of minutes to find its a prime example of eve marketing, read it carefully Edited cause i need a spell checker here is another link
Thanos Draicon	Posted - 2007.09.15 01:11:00 - [34] And where did it say that those battles would be lag-free? Hundreds could mean two hundred, and a battle with two hundred people is generally playable.
CharlieMurphy Amarr Viziam	Posted - 2007.09.15 01:21:00 - [35] Edited by: CharlieMurphy on 15/09/2007 01:21:38 forgive my late edits here is another link and interestingly its 1 year old notice where he talks about Quote: 200+ ships crammed in the same solar system, I'm talking about the blob where those 200 ships are crammed in to the same 10km radius sphere i think its fair to say that while no exact numbers are given the general impression given out to the players is that large scale battles are a normal part of eves gameplay
Thanos Draicon	Posted - 2007.09.15 01:28:00 - [36] Just because he says "large scale" it doesn't mean that he thinks battles with 800 people should be the norm. I still fail to see how CCP is failing any promises unless they say, explicitly, "Fight in battles of 800 people or more!" of whatever your personal threshold of "epic battles" is. Personally, I think that CCP is accountable for battles of 200 or less players to be playable and with a reasonable amount of lag. Anything larger than that? Play at your own risk.
Krazy Jake The Hieros Confederacy	Posted - 2007.09.15 02:03:00 - [37] So invest in a computer that can run the game and you will see how much CCP has invested into this game. Windows 98 is dead, forget about it and move on. You also have the choice of leaving EVE. "If someone angers you, try walking a mile in their shoes. If your still angry, who cares. Your a mile away and you have their shoes."
Dred'Pirate Jesus Amarr Ministry of War	Posted - 2007.09.15 02:46:00 - [38] I was really starting to get on the side of the lag/desync whiners due to my constant disconnect problems after the Rev II patch and database hardware upgrades.. I then reset my router and now all is well.. Originally by: David Hackworth ò If you find yourself in a fair fight, you didn't plan your mission properly.
Tzt	Posted - 2007.09.15 04:03:00 - [39] reading the CAOD forum I get the feeling there's a lot of very, very, very frustrated players out there :(
Amarria Black Clan Anthraxx	Posted - 2007.09.15 04:35:00 - [40] Originally by: fuze Why don't you get it in your thick skull that CCP doesn't know how to fix the lag? Then why aren't they hiring someone who does? When you're trying to put an object in orbit, you don't just stand around and scratch your head, you hire a f'ing rocket scientist.
C601	Posted - 2007.09.15 04:38:00 - [41] Only people I feel bad for in this game are the ones that need to Rat for hrs and days on end just to make enough Isk to buy 2-3 ships only to lose them in 1-2hrs at best from lag and desync from a 200 man battle, poor bastards never had a chance to begun with.. And then petitioning is just another slap in the face, from my own personal experience and what others have said. I guess thats why the average player spends about 9months playing eve and then decides lag is too much the deal with it and moves on. Like someone said along time ago in a thread like this, 0.0 fleet battles look good on paper, but that's about it. I'm sure CCP have there best interests in this game, after all EVE goes belly up, lots of people are going to be out of a job. Problem is as stated above, if your looking for a game lag free this is not it, because the fact is EVE will always have lag. Not even a $6000+ computer will save you from lag, with Cable internet, in a 200+ fleet battle. Aleast it looks nice
Thanos Draicon	Posted - 2007.09.15 05:19:00 - [42] Originally by: Amarria Black Then why aren't they hiring someone who does? When you're trying to put an object in orbit, you don't just stand around and scratch your head, you hire a f'ing rocket scientist. They are fixing it, but like advanced rocket research, it doesn't always work the first time. According to the devs the desync problem lies very deep in their network code (which they are now in the process of rewriting anyway) so it's very difficult to find. Originally by: C601 I guess thats why the average player spends about 9months playing eve and then decides lag is too much the deal with it and moves on. Like someone said along time ago in a thread like this, 0.0 fleet battles look good on paper, but that's about it. I don't think the average eve player fights in 0.0 wars all the time, honestly. I could be wrong though. And it's not like massive battles are all there is to EVE either. If anyone doesn't like said fleet battles, then just don't participate in them; the developers don't force you to. I've been playing for two years and lag has never been a real problem for me because I know giant fleet battles and jita are laggy, so I avoid them like the plague. I hardly ever have to deal with lag.
Curzon Dax The Ninja Coalition	Posted - 2007.09.15 06:39:00 - [43] Originally by: Born Slippy Originally by: Gnulpie Originally by: Thanos Draicon I've played EVE alot, actually. I'd say it's quite playable. That is the thing...quite playable. If you engange 10 vs 10 or even 20 vs 20 then it is fine - eventually. But if you have 30+ carriers all with fighters flying around plus all the support ship, 150 vs 150, then it is NOT playable any more. 10 vs 10 I can play elsewhere, no problem. The amazing thing about Eve is the open end! Someone can just throw in more and then you have to cope with it...as long as everything works. But if you cannot play any more then it is broken and needs really some change! Then your answer is...... dont participate in 200 man fleet battles! TADARR! If CCP didn't want 200 person fleet battles, then they would shard the servers and cap the nodes.
MaxSkywalker x13	Posted - 2007.09.15 07:43:00 - [44] Put the Top Gear boys on the casem they fixed a road in 24 hours . Regards MaxSkywalker *x13*
Hogan Hulk	Posted - 2007.09.15 07:57:00 - [45] Originally by: Gnulpie Dear CCP, it cannot be that you initiate the jump into a system and you get the message 'jumping', then nothing happens for ages. And while you wait that the system loads you look at the enemy killboard and notice that you got already killed while you still not have loaded the system! How can anyone be supposed to play such a game? It is absolutely frustrating to everyone. If the servers cannot cope with the many ships, then just close down the system gracefully for a good while and say 'sorry guys, try again in a few days'. Everything is better than that what happens at the moment. It is absolutely clear that the server fails the load! And the amount of valid petitions will cause also cause some work afterwards. So, just take down systems with too much load. If you don't understand what I am talking about look at the 0OYZ-G system now or a while ago the BKG-Q2 system. STOP BLOBING ! There you go...fixed.
Amarria Black Clan Anthraxx	Posted - 2007.09.15 08:28:00 - [46] Originally by: Thanos Draicon Originally by: Amarria Black Then why aren't they hiring someone who does? When you're trying to put an object in orbit, you don't just stand around and scratch your head, you hire a f'ing rocket scientist. They are fixing it, but like advanced rocket research, it doesn't always work the first time. According to the devs the desync problem lies very deep in their network code (which they are now in the process of rewriting anyway) so it's very difficult to find. They're bashing their head against the problem one way (by focusing on node capacity) instead of changing perspective and removing the source of the problem. If blobs had their incentives removed (decentralization of sovereignty objectives, diminishing returns based upon fleet size, etc.) then you wouldn't have the problem of blob -v- blob combat being the norm for alliance warfare. This removes the player complaints, which buys you the time you need to target and eliminate the coding problem that limits number of objects on grid. This is my complaint: not that CCP isn't working on fixing numbers-induced node death, but that they leave the mechanics in place that incentivize the gathering of said numbers when the underlying engine simply can't support it.
Geshwin	Posted - 2007.09.15 09:05:00 - [47] at last, its all the fault of the stupidest database software ever, named microsoft sql, how can a game run on this? u see the answer every day in some bigger engagements, it cant, i remember a situation with 500 ppl in local, warpin to my own pos and had 20 minutes to wait to load my own grid , but its np, servers are working fine, there was no lag, desync? what is this? and hey, dont forget its all about ur crappy pcs around, so go get a ****in nasa cray monster
fire 59 Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.09.15 09:16:00 - [48] Originally by: Hogan Hulk Originally by: Gnulpie Dear CCP, it cannot be that you initiate the jump into a system and you get the message 'jumping', then nothing happens for ages. And while you wait that the system loads you look at the enemy killboard and notice that you got already killed while you still not have loaded the system! How can anyone be supposed to play such a game? It is absolutely frustrating to everyone. If the servers cannot cope with the many ships, then just close down the system gracefully for a good while and say 'sorry guys, try again in a few days'. Everything is better than that what happens at the moment. It is absolutely clear that the server fails the load! And the amount of valid petitions will cause also cause some work afterwards. So, just take down systems with too much load. If you don't understand what I am talking about look at the 0OYZ-G system now or a while ago the BKG-Q2 system. STOP BLOBING ! There you go...fixed. This. Allied forces strike coalition fleet, wrecking for toys thrown out of pram damage ^^
Mecinia Lua Galactic Express Frontier Trade League	Posted - 2007.09.15 10:03:00 - [49] To have a lag free environment: 1. We need computers that can assimilate a large amount of data while receiving the data and transmitting responses. (Humans can respond consciously to stimuli once every six seconds on average with an upper limit of about once every three seconds. So you really need computing power that can process thousands and even millions of packets of data in nanoseconds, so that from the time it receives a packet it transmits the response in less than 1 second. Not only do we need this but we'd have to convince every single person to replace their computers to these new faster computers :). 2. We need a transmission system that is capable of near light speed transmission rates. Phone lines are not capable of this, and most digital optic cable are not fully capable of it either. Thus CCP faces a primarily technological problem. We as a world are just not yet advanced enough to meet those 2 conditions. The problem is that many games are sharded and that minimizes the problem, however EVE has grown differently. It would be hard to shard EVE at this late stage, not impossible but would certainly be difficult (and the new shard would face some of the problems the China server has had.) The next solution would be caps on how many in a system. How do you code this? How do your recognize who are friends and who are not? I suppose you could go by standings, but that might still lead to problems. Why you might ask? Folks would just fail to set standings with some of their friends to get around the rules, in fact a few might even set friends negative to get around a cap. What value to you give POSs towards a cap? So the problem is not an easy one to fix. I'm sure if you have some idea of how to fix the problem that CCP would be willing to listen. Even if it is just a suggestion that could mitigate the effects I'm sure they'd consider it. Thoughts expressed are mine and mine alone. They do not necessarily reflect my alliances thoughts.
Stakhanov Katana's Edge	Posted - 2007.09.15 10:14:00 - [50] Originally by: Gnulpie And while you wait that the system loads you look at the enemy killboard and notice that you got already killed while you still not have loaded the system! That's because you are fighting BoB. You're all dead - you just don't know it yet Originally by: Cipher7 If you manage to get baited, what's your skill, being a good victim?
fuze	Posted - 2007.09.15 10:52:00 - [51] Originally by: Amarria Black Then why aren't they hiring someone who does? When you're trying to put an object in orbit, you don't just stand around and scratch your head, you hire a f'ing rocket scientist. They ARE the f'ing rocket scientists. If Blizzard wants to upscale their instances they would have to hire CCP *****s.
Theo Samaritan Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2007.09.15 11:04:00 - [52] I love it when people don't read what the dev's say. Quote: The Trinity 2 engine is able to handle things such as fleet battles and large NPC encounters much better than the current one. That is what's being referred to as an "optimization" in the paragraph above but now properly emphasized with this note. From the recent devblog on finalised features. THEY. ARE. FIXING. IT. Jesus, if you think you can do better start your own damn game. ______________________________ A Request About Lag Discussion -- Yet another "Edit my sig devs!" request \o/
Meirre K'Tun Causing Trouble	Posted - 2007.09.15 11:12:00 - [53] Originally by: fuze Originally by: Amarria Black Then why aren't they hiring someone who does? When you're trying to put an object in orbit, you don't just stand around and scratch your head, you hire a f'ing rocket scientist. They ARE the f'ing rocket scientists. If Blizzard wants to upscale their instances they would have to hire CCP *****s. first, they should hire a clown to make them fun. anyways: someone mentioned decentralization of sov. objects. i think that would work, if you had to capture/destroy something in the systems around your targent system as well, so that both sides would have to split their forces.
Sharon Lynn	Posted - 2007.09.15 11:16:00 - [54] Edited by: Sharon Lynn on 15/09/2007 11:16:22 Originally by: Jatonix Dear Clueless Newb, Shut up. Regards, The Management Please don't talk to yourself, it makes you look silly
Ki An Gallente KDM Corp Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.09.15 11:21:00 - [55] Edited by: Ki An on 15/09/2007 11:22:27 Lag is one of the most whined about issues today. It's a valid issue, and people have a right to expect being able to play the game they are paying for. However, like so much else in Eve, even lag-whining has become politicized. As the OP has already remarked, just recently the "coalition" lost a big battle against the "alliance" in Feythabolis. This has prompted a veritable storm of complaints all over these boards. Agendas are being put forward in order to gain an advantage in Eve six months from now. People who have no knowledge about game developing are speaking out as experts on complicated issues. It all seem so obvious: Nerf the carrier, as the fighter drones used by the carrier is the most common cause for lag. It just so happens that one of the sides in "Eve War I" has a carrier advantage over the other. Noone of those driving this issue is working at CCP (to my knowledge) and thus have no real insight in how carriers work code-wize. Even so it's "obvious" that carriers are to blame. Not the fact that people regularly show up with 500 at each side and cram everyone into one system. Not the fact that week old n00bs are being told to bring their rookie ship to the "epic fight", where it really won't do any good except clutter the grid. No, carriers are obviously to blame. Think about this people: CCP are aware of the lag. You may get an automatted response to your petition claiming "the logs show no lag", but that's not the same as CCP not caring about this issue. Eve has become better and better, and can handle more and more people, but the big alliances just keep bringing more and more people. Like someone's sig said (Crumplecorn <3) "Fleetbattles don't cause the server to lag. People keep bringing more and more people to a fleetbattle until the server lags" (paraphrased because I can't remember the exact wording). There is a solution: When you are going to have an "epic fight", bring only ships that are useful in such a fight. Dictors, ceptors, battleships, cov-ops and command ships. Sprinkle with capitals of course. Leave the rookie ships and shuttles at home. Lag will be significantly reduced and everyone will have a good time. The n00b who can't fly any of the needed ships can always sit a few systems out with a hauler and a salvager. /Ki Remember kids: Beware: I'm a "viscous pirate"!
Theo Samaritan Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2007.09.15 11:39:00 - [56] Originally by: Ki An Edited by: Ki An on 15/09/2007 11:22:27 Lag is one of the most whined about issues today. It's a valid issue, and people have a right to expect being able to play the game they are paying for. However, like so much else in Eve, even lag-whining has become politicized. As the OP has already remarked, just recently the "coalition" lost a big battle against the "alliance" in Feythabolis. This has prompted a veritable storm of complaints all over these boards. Agendas are being put forward in order to gain an advantage in Eve six months from now. People who have no knowledge about game developing are speaking out as experts on complicated issues. It all seem so obvious: Nerf the carrier, as the fighter drones used by the carrier is the most common cause for lag. It just so happens that one of the sides in "Eve War I" has a carrier advantage over the other. Noone of those driving this issue is working at CCP (to my knowledge) and thus have no real insight in how carriers work code-wize. Even so it's "obvious" that carriers are to blame. Not the fact that people regularly show up with 500 at each side and cram everyone into one system. Not the fact that week old n00bs are being told to bring their rookie ship to the "epic fight", where it really won't do any good except clutter the grid. No, carriers are obviously to blame. Think about this people: CCP are aware of the lag. You may get an automatted response to your petition claiming "the logs show no lag", but that's not the same as CCP not caring about this issue. Eve has become better and better, and can handle more and more people, but the big alliances just keep bringing more and more people. Like someone's sig said (Crumplecorn <3) "Fleetbattles don't cause the server to lag. People keep bringing more and more people to a fleetbattle until the server lags" (paraphrased because I can't remember the exact wording). There is a solution: When you are going to have an "epic fight", bring only ships that are useful in such a fight. Dictors, ceptors, battleships, cov-ops and command ships. Sprinkle with capitals of course. Leave the rookie ships and shuttles at home. Lag will be significantly reduced and everyone will have a good time. The n00b who can't fly any of the needed ships can always sit a few systems out with a hauler and a salvager. /Ki By far the most meaningfull post here. ______________________________ A Request About Lag Discussion -- Yet another "Edit my sig devs!" request \o/
Diozeki	Posted - 2007.09.15 11:51:00 - [57] Edited by: Diozeki on 15/09/2007 11:54:53 I think CCP has a really great game, and I think they will get to it. furthermore, I think that if WoW's forums are any indication, the people in the position to do anythig about the game are not reading the forums. you should email them directly. also, Eve has become amazingly popular for what a niche game it is. they have put so much money into the best equipment, and it still lags, they obviosuly need more and to have dynamic load sharing, and they are getting to both of these. Could they make it so that instead of a server or bank of servers controlling a system, the servers deal with the ships instead? I imagine servers to run the systems like now, but with dynamic load sharing, but the server that send the info back to your client is set to be on your ship only and 99 other ships, and these servers are in the same room, so one larger server bundle would serve a bunch of smaller servers at blindingly fast speed, which would in turn trickle down to the ships that the peripheral servers control. would that work and would it get rid of the non load problems? I think of it like one server is assigned to communicate betweeen your ship and only 99 others at max, and is optimized to work with your ship, and updates to be optimized if you change your ship, same with the 99 others, and as a server it interacts with the other servers as needed to bring you the information. instead of sectioning space by server, seperate ships into server groups, which are in turn served by a central server group, and then the main server group could tell the NPC and world events to the ship servers, which tells it to you, and other ship servers would communicate directly with your server when you meet someone else in space. is this a viable cost effective architectures that would work at all? I have no clue
Korcahn Gallente Eve University Ivy League	Posted - 2007.09.15 11:58:00 - [58] Ok then, 150v150 world pvp zergs in world of warcraft :P Or DaoC, Or EQ2, or <insert game here> ___________________________________
CharlieMurphy Amarr Viziam	Posted - 2007.09.15 12:49:00 - [59] Originally by: Theo Samaritan I love it when people don't read what the dev's say. Quote: The Trinity 2 engine is able to handle things such as fleet battles and large NPC encounters much better than the current one. That is what's being referred to as an "optimization" in the paragraph above but now properly emphasized with this note. From the recent devblog on finalised features. THEY. ARE. FIXING. IT. Jesus, if you think you can do better start your own damn game. so if we are still suffering the same poor gameplay 1 month after trinity 2 do you think CCP should stop charging people to play until they keep their promise? of course, they are fixing it so this situation will never arise but hyperthetically speaking... ?
Theo Samaritan Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2007.09.15 12:52:00 - [60] Originally by: CharlieMurphy Originally by: Theo Samaritan I love it when people don't read what the dev's say. Quote: The Trinity 2 engine is able to handle things such as fleet battles and large NPC encounters much better than the current one. That is what's being referred to as an "optimization" in the paragraph above but now properly emphasized with this note. From the recent devblog on finalised features. THEY. ARE. FIXING. IT. Jesus, if you think you can do better start your own damn game. so if we are still suffering the same poor gameplay 1 month after trinity 2 do you think CCP should stop charging people to play until they keep their promise? of course, they are fixing it so this situation will never arise but hyperthetically speaking... ? Maybe 3 months, bare in mind what happens after patch day, and the new engine is a mother of a big patch... ______________________________ A Request About Lag Discussion -- Yet another "Edit my sig devs!" request \o/

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: 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.