EVE Search - Practical, Realistic Jita Solutions: Quick and Long Term

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Practical, Realistic Jita Solutions: Quick and Long Term

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Rells Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.12.08 19:27:00 - [1] Edited by: Rells on 08/12/2007 19:36:20 Edited by: Rells on 08/12/2007 19:28:23 Jita is unplayable now. There is no way it can be argued otherwise with the recent GM closures of Jita. There needs to be a quick solution to the major market hub in the game. Short Term For the time being make all stations in Jita and all stations within a jump of Jita in the forge deliver all purchased items from jita to the buyer in their station. This will allow people to spread out. Hot patch this so we can use the major market hub. Long Term Solution Make broker fees scale up depending upon the number of orders in the station. When you put in a new sell order, the broker fees will be proportionate to the number of orders in the system to the point where they are 100% or more of the order theoretically. Keep in mind that broker fees in practice will never get to that level because people in the market will spread out when they get too expensive. This will make it too expensive to put in an order in a station that is already flooded. This makes sense as a station should have finite amount of space. In addition to this measure, change courier contracts so that the plastic wrap can not be opened except by the person making the contract. This would mean that people would have more confidence in other people shipping gear for them and aspiring shippers would know that they cant be as easily screwed. The result is that over time the market will spread out first from the station and to other stations in the system and then to neighboring systems. Controversial VERY Long Term Solution This solution is very long term and I know it is controversial but the idea has interesting points. Just hear me out here. The goal would be to have a section of 0.0 in the middle of empire and to lower the boundaries between factions in empire to the point that the pilot must fly through 0.0 to get from Gallente to Caldari for example. In addition make a large hole of 0.0 in the middle of empire. This will mean that the geographical center of the universe will be 0.0 space. In order to compensate for lost empire space, the sec status of current lowsec systems will gradually rise. This can be explained as an increase in tensions among the factions. The current lowsec border regions would slowly drop in sec status over the course of a month or more. The goal of this is to encourage regional markets to form and professional shipments between empire regions and markets. No matter how you reconfigure gates, people will always seek the center of the universe for the trade hub. If that center is 0.0 then that will cause more than one trade hub to form. Shipping with jump freighters for players will become a new profession and the market will be more diverse and spread out. All of these together would solve the problem of Jita and then cause the market in the center to spread out and the people there as well. In addition, it will diversify the market and encourage regional markets and open up new opportunities for play styles (such as a shipping corporation). As jita begins to change to 0.0 you pull the distributed local delivery system that I reccomended in the first part. Four years is long enough to leave the corp interface broken!
Won Swunglow Caldari Dead By Dawn	Posted - 2007.12.08 19:33:00 - [2] I love it... make it so Also Interbus could be used as a delivery service, as players do with freighters atm, Interbus could charge the player a set sum per jump to deliver your goods to you. Only in Empire systems ofcourse.
Tarminic Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand	Posted - 2007.12.08 19:35:00 - [3] Or just...you know...BUY AND SELL THINGS PLACES OTHER THAN JITA. ---------------- Tarminic - 29 Million SP in ~~pink~~ Forum Warfare
Rells Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.12.08 19:38:00 - [4] Originally by: Tarminic Or just...you know...BUY AND SELL THINGS PLACES OTHER THAN JITA. Saying it accomplishes nothing. You have to provide incentives or people will ignore you as history has shown. Four years is long enough to leave the corp interface broken!
Rells Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.12.08 19:39:00 - [5] Originally by: Won Swunglow I love it... make it so Also Interbus could be used as a delivery service, as players do with freighters atm, Interbus could charge the player a set sum per jump to deliver your goods to you. Only in Empire systems ofcourse. I would prefer to leave that with the players. Four years is long enough to leave the corp interface broken!
Sakura Nihil Stimulus	Posted - 2007.12.08 19:43:00 - [6] Originally by: Tarminic Or just...you know...BUY AND SELL THINGS PLACES OTHER THAN JITA. Exactly. Jita is a player-developed problem, the answer to it should not come from CCP's programmers but from the players. Support your local markets, buy stuff in the area and pay a few million ISK more on a ship and its fittings, for the convenience of not having to go a few dozen jumps at most to Jita. But for those players that do buy and sell in Jita, I say to them, you know the risks, it may lag you. Its like going into lowsec or 0.0, you know its likely you'll be shot at - same deal, when you jump into Jita you know the potential for it to freeze up, so you have no right to complain. But, I will give you points for the broker system idea. Makes gameplay sense, why wouldn't brokers want more cash for the work they'd have to do in a trade hub, and its a way of passively encouraging people to spread out without using brute programming force like your first solution. Say no to knee-jerk additions and nerfs, mmkay?
Nycha	Posted - 2007.12.08 19:44:00 - [7] A small fix would be an option for the autopilot to not use jita in a route.
Rells Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.12.08 19:47:00 - [8] Brute force is needed for the short term. The other impelemtnations are to encourage people to spread out using psychology. You and others can say "spread out" as much as you want until blue in the face but if Jita stays the only place to get everything, the situation snowballs. Poeple have no incentive to spread out and wont do so. In response they deal with the lag and complain about server lag (which frankly CCP can only do so much about.) Neophytes to macro psychology will say "JUST SELL ELSEWHERE" but those that know about how macro psychology works will tell you that people only do something when they have incentive to do so. Screaming accomplishes nothing. Making fees higher and making borders between regions more harsh will change that situation on a macro level. Four years is long enough to leave the corp interface broken!
Tarminic Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand	Posted - 2007.12.08 19:49:00 - [9] Originally by: Rells Originally by: Tarminic Or just...you know...BUY AND SELL THINGS PLACES OTHER THAN JITA. Saying it accomplishes nothing. You have to provide incentives or people will ignore you as history has shown. And the inability to login, incessant lag, long loading times, traffic jams, and overcrowded market isn't enough incentive? I'm against any coding changes to alleviate the Jita problem simple because if you do this for one system traffic will just bunch up in another one, so the only way to stay ahead it is to continue to implement code-bloating and poorly-scalable hotfixes to try and alleviate some of the stress. I think this is a bad idea. I already do my part by not going there, if others want to subject themselves to Jita its their choice, but I don't think CCP's coders should waste time on a player-created problem with a player-created solution when they could be fixing something more relevant to my ability to play. ---------------- Tarminic - 29 Million SP in ~~pink~~ Forum Warfare
Rells Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.12.08 19:49:00 - [10] Originally by: Nycha A small fix would be an option for the autopilot to not use jita in a route. Wouldnt help. People mostly in jita are there to buy and sell, not transit. You could add another gateway between lonetrek and the forge to help traffic and move things along. However, it would do nothing for the Jita issue. Four years is long enough to leave the corp interface broken!
Scilent Enigma Minmatar Vae Victis Inc.	Posted - 2007.12.08 19:51:00 - [11] Sounds good, but I'd settle with the Autopilot not plotting the course through Jita no matter where you are going. (Yes I just filed a stuck petition)
madaluap Gallente Mercenary Forces Exquisite Malevolence	Posted - 2007.12.08 19:51:00 - [12] I really like your "controversial" idea, imagine eve constantly moving, changing in security status. Oh the whining that would commence for some, but damn it would really make eve the sandbox game it should be. And no interbus crap, i prefer real players to move my goods (and dont mind paying more for it). Plenty of my BS/faction were moved across 20 jumps. (takes a day maybe for someone to accept and usually delivered 1-2 days later) _________________________________________________ Breetime A killmail!11!1 omgrawr: BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Katharina Gorbacheva Amarr Soviet Star Federation Celestial Frontier	Posted - 2007.12.08 19:51:00 - [13] Originally by: Rells The goal would be to have a section of 0.0 in the middle of empire and to lower the boundaries between factions in empire to the point that the pilot must fly through 0.0 to get from Gallente to Caldari for example. Almost no one would tolerate such a nerf.
Rells Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.12.08 19:52:00 - [14] Originally by: Tarminic Originally by: Rells Originally by: Tarminic Or just...you know...BUY AND SELL THINGS PLACES OTHER THAN JITA. Saying it accomplishes nothing. You have to provide incentives or people will ignore you as history has shown. And the inability to login, incessant lag, long loading times, traffic jams, and overcrowded market isn't enough incentive? I'm against any coding changes to alleviate the Jita problem simple because if you do this for one system traffic will just bunch up in another one, so the only way to stay ahead it is to continue to implement code-bloating and poorly-scalable hotfixes to try and alleviate some of the stress. I think this is a bad idea. I already do my part by not going there, if others want to subject themselves to Jita its their choice, but I don't think CCP's coders should waste time on a player-created problem with a player-created solution when they could be fixing something more relevant to my ability to play. You dont understand macro psychology. Neither did Karl Marx if that makes you feel any better. Jita is the only place you can get high value ships such as HACs without paying highway robery prices. There are many many many macro psychological incentives pushing people to jita and the fact that "everyone goes to jita" is one of those reasons. It is also a POWERFUL reason. To counter this you must put in macro psychological reasons to go elsewhere. Four years is long enough to leave the corp interface broken!
Rells Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.12.08 19:56:00 - [15] Originally by: Katharina Gorbacheva Originally by: Rells The goal would be to have a section of 0.0 in the middle of empire and to lower the boundaries between factions in empire to the point that the pilot must fly through 0.0 to get from Gallente to Caldari for example. Almost no one would tolerate such a nerf. Dont speak for others. Your opinions are confied to yourself and those that agree with you and barring polling of eve players in a statistical manner, your conclusions about everyone are hypothetical at best. I know as lot of people that love the idea. Only bleeding heart empire carebears with no concern for the game as a whole have opposed the idea as far as I have observed. The ironic thing is that these poeple are often centralized logging into less than a dozen mission center hubs or into Jita itself. I can see almost no reasons the change would be bad for the game. I can see how some people may not like it because of selfish motives. I cant think of a way it would hurt the game. Four years is long enough to leave the corp interface broken!
Nycha	Posted - 2007.12.08 19:57:00 - [16] Quote: Wouldnt help. People mostly in jita are there to buy and sell, not transit. You could add another gateway between lonetrek and the forge to help traffic and move things along. However, it would do nothing for the Jita issue. Im fully aware that this wont fix the general jita problem, but it will help a bit. Thats the reason I wrote "small". Another possible fix would be to split jita up. Say, you can buy/sell ships, ships mods and so on in jita. In perimeter you can buy/sell minerals and other basic ressources and in new caldari you can buy/sell the reset. Thats an example.
Sakura Nihil Stimulus	Posted - 2007.12.08 19:57:00 - [17] Edited by: Sakura Nihil on 08/12/2007 20:00:42 Originally by: Rells Brute force is needed for the short term. The other impelemtnations are to encourage people to spread out using psychology. You and others can say "spread out" as much as you want until blue in the face but if Jita stays the only place to get everything, the situation snowballs. Poeple have no incentive to spread out and wont do so. In response they deal with the lag and complain about server lag (which frankly CCP can only do so much about.) The incentive to spread out is the lag, though. Remove it through a brute force solution, and you'll have people that have been avoiding Jita coming back there to shop, and wherever they were buying from previously is going to take an economic hit. Economic pressure is the way to go in this situation. To discourage people from congregating to such a degree, you have to reduce the profit people earn in such areas by increasing costs through fees. Frankly, however, I disagree that Jita is the "only place to get everything". Faction, officer, and deadspace modules? You would have a decently strong case, but T2 fits, ships, all that? No - other markets have most of what you need in their hubs, you might have to walk around a few jumps but that's not so bad. Originally by: Rells Neophytes to macro psychology will say "JUST SELL ELSEWHERE" but those that know about how macro psychology works will tell you that people only do something when they have incentive to do so. Screaming accomplishes nothing. Making fees higher and making borders between regions more harsh will change that situation on a macro level. Borders are too extreme, but fees are correct. Originally by: Rells Jita is the only place you can get high value ships such as HACs without paying highway robery prices. at this assumption - minor regions without an established hub in them, yes, true, but try checking the Citadel, Lonetrek, Domain, Sinq Laison, Heimatar, or Metropolis sometime. Are they a bit pricier, say 5-10m more? Yeah, but highway robbery? Lol, no. Say no to knee-jerk additions and nerfs, mmkay?
SiJira	Posted - 2007.12.08 19:59:00 - [18] no one likes your short term solution either its worse than the last one ____ __ ________ _sig below_ devs and gms cant modify my sig if they tried! _lies above_ CCP Morpheus was here Morpheus Fails. You need colors!! -Kaemonn [yellow]Kaem
Akion Noscire	Posted - 2007.12.08 20:01:00 - [19] Originally by: Rells Originally by: Katharina Gorbacheva Originally by: Rells The goal would be to have a section of 0.0 in the middle of empire and to lower the boundaries between factions in empire to the point that the pilot must fly through 0.0 to get from Gallente to Caldari for example. Almost no one would tolerate such a nerf. Dont speak for others. Your opinions are confied to yourself and those that agree with you and barring polling of eve players in a statistical manner, your conclusions about everyone are hypothetical at best. I know as lot of people that love the idea. Only bleeding heart empire carebears with no concern for the game as a whole have opposed the idea as far as I have observed. The ironic thing is that these poeple are often centralized logging into less than a dozen mission center hubs or into Jita itself. I can see almost no reasons the change would be bad for the game. I can see how some people may not like it because of selfish motives. I cant think of a way it would hurt the game. This will most likely create the biggest chokepoints ever.
Rells Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.12.08 20:03:00 - [20] Originally by: SiJira no one likes your short term solution either its worse than the last one Clearly you are incorrect as several have said they like it. So your absolute "no one" is just preposterous from this very thread if you had bothered to read it. Second of all the short term solution would merely restore the market hub to be usable which it isnt now. But then you just try to be flippant and snide and offer no solutions of your own. Your choice but narrow minded and a useless post except to bump the thread. Four years is long enough to leave the corp interface broken!
Sakura Nihil Stimulus	Posted - 2007.12.08 20:03:00 - [21] Originally by: Akion Noscire Originally by: Rells Originally by: Katharina Gorbacheva Originally by: Rells The goal would be to have a section of 0.0 in the middle of empire and to lower the boundaries between factions in empire to the point that the pilot must fly through 0.0 to get from Gallente to Caldari for example. Almost no one would tolerate such a nerf. Dont speak for others. Your opinions are confied to yourself and those that agree with you and barring polling of eve players in a statistical manner, your conclusions about everyone are hypothetical at best. I know as lot of people that love the idea. Only bleeding heart empire carebears with no concern for the game as a whole have opposed the idea as far as I have observed. The ironic thing is that these poeple are often centralized logging into less than a dozen mission center hubs or into Jita itself. I can see almost no reasons the change would be bad for the game. I can see how some people may not like it because of selfish motives. I cant think of a way it would hurt the game. This will most likely create the biggest chokepoints ever. Of course it would, imagine all the ships that would be killed trying to pass the area . That being said, the kind of borders Rells are looking at would be lowsec. However, as they don't cut off empires from each other completely, there's almost always a highsec route to take, which means relative safety for everyone and depopulation of lowsec. A long-term border fix he looks at should be the extension of lowsec, not the creation of 0.0. Say no to knee-jerk additions and nerfs, mmkay?
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2007.12.08 20:05:00 - [22] Originally by: Sakura Nihil Economic pressure is the way to go in this situation. To discourage people from congregating to such a degree, you have to reduce the profit people earn in such areas by increasing costs through fees. Agree. This has been suggested many times and to my knowledge a Dev has never commented on it. Which is too bad since it is an elegant solution. Adds a money sink to the game. Allows players to do as they wish and sort out there own mess while applying pressure to spread out. Makes sense too as we all understand things to work this way (you want to rent a store in a high traffic mall you will pay more than to rent a store in some remote strip mall). They would need to add a line to the market order/contract window that would show the broker fee in relation to the region average appropriately colored green or red. My only question to this would be do you apply the fee to a whole system or just a station? Only per station would make more realistic sense but then you'd probably just see a hub form in Nonni which has a zillion stations.
Rells Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.12.08 20:07:00 - [23] Originally by: Sakura Nihil The incentive to spread out is the lag, though. Borders are too extreme, but fees are correct. Clearly that isnt enough incentive. Argue what people should do all you want. Im telling you what they actually do. The fact that a huge percentage of sales in the game happen in Jita makes what people should do irrelevant. In addition the fact that lag has not encouraged the result desired to this point merely served as an indication that the incentive is not sufficient. Harder borders would encourage regionality. You cant just yell "sell elsewhere". If that would work on a macro scale it would have worked 3 years ago. It hasnt worked and is apparently insufficient. Four years is long enough to leave the corp interface broken!
Nycha	Posted - 2007.12.08 20:18:00 - [24] Rells, youre aware that the jump-in points to 0.0 on such routes will be camped 24/7? Youre also aware that jump-freighters will be used in the foreseeable future only by corps/alliances with enough isk and only by players with lot of SP? That persons with 1 account will not be able to transport, as you need jump-freighter + cyno*****?
Sakura Nihil Stimulus	Posted - 2007.12.08 20:18:00 - [25] Originally by: Rells Originally by: Sakura Nihil The incentive to spread out is the lag, though. Borders are too extreme, but fees are correct. Clearly that isnt enough incentive. Argue what people should do all you want. Im telling you what they actually do. The fact that a huge percentage of sales in the game happen in Jita makes what people should do irrelevant. In addition the fact that lag has not encouraged the result desired to this point merely served as an indication that the incentive is not sufficient. Harder borders would encourage regionality. You cant just yell "sell elsewhere". If that would work on a macro scale it would have worked 3 years ago. It hasnt worked and is apparently insufficient. Its essentially informed consent, however. You know when you're going to Jita what can happen, when I'm in the area and decide to go to Jita, I accept the fact that a whole lot of bad things can happen and deal with it. If I lock up, oh well, I knew the risks and won't complain - but, when people do complain, that's where I take issue - when they get moved, come back to Jita, and lock up again, that's where my faith in the ability of humanity to learn and change its behavior comes into question. CCP can only provide so much computing power right now to Jita, why should they make a system "special"? You want to talk about psycology, fine, giving Jita special treatment will only exacerbate the problem, like I said earlier. It will change the game mechanics, and suck even more life out of the already red-headed stepchildren of a market that is Oursulaert, Amarr, and Rens, turning it from a supherhub into a permanent game fixture. Borders would be okay if it was lowsec and not 0.0, you are correct in those regards. Large volumes could be moved by jump freighter across the area by nearby lowsec, and it would fit with the backstory of the empires "going to war" (whenever that's coming in ). 0.0 is too far, however. This ability to move cargo with a bit of effort, or stay within an empire for fear of getting ganked would encourge intra-regional trade, as well as revitalize the concept of lowsec. Say no to knee-jerk additions and nerfs, mmkay?
Rells Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.12.08 20:22:00 - [26] Originally by: Nycha Rells, youre aware that the jump-in points to 0.0 on such routes will be camped 24/7? Youre also aware that jump-freighters will be used in the foreseeable future only by corps/alliances with enough isk and only by players with lot of SP? That persons with 1 account will not be able to transport, as you need jump-freighter + cyno*****? Or you need some friends. Gate camps can be repulsed and destroyed. Try not to be such a wimp. Four years is long enough to leave the corp interface broken!
Tarminic Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand	Posted - 2007.12.08 20:25:00 - [27] Originally by: Rells Originally by: Nycha Rells, youre aware that the jump-in points to 0.0 on such routes will be camped 24/7? Youre also aware that jump-freighters will be used in the foreseeable future only by corps/alliances with enough isk and only by players with lot of SP? That persons with 1 account will not be able to transport, as you need jump-freighter + cyno*****? Or you need some friends. Gate camps can be repulsed and destroyed. Try not to be such a wimp. No need to get hostile, he brings up some good points. Any solution implemented should not make it extremely difficult for a solo player to travel between empires. ---------------- Tarminic - 29 Million SP in ~~pink~~ Forum Warfare
Nycha	Posted - 2007.12.08 20:37:00 - [28] Originally by: Rells Originally by: Nycha Rells, youre aware that the jump-in points to 0.0 on such routes will be camped 24/7? Youre also aware that jump-freighters will be used in the foreseeable future only by corps/alliances with enough isk and only by players with lot of SP? That persons with 1 account will not be able to transport, as you need jump-freighter + cyno*****? Or you need some friends. Gate camps can be repulsed and destroyed. Try not to be such a wimp. You wrote practical/realistic in your topic but the more you write the more I get the feeling youre dreaming a (nice?) dream. This will happen: hXXp://tri.exanimo.org/?a=kills Check the misaba entries. Thats TRI sitting at the jump-in to providence killing the macros. I have no mercy for the macros, thats not the point. But, following youre own advice, you can get some friends and try to get some industrials save through this choke-point by destroying their gatecamp. Get real, people will always go for the cheap, fast cash. Yesterday its MOMs camping lowsec gates, today its empire ganking in choke-points and tomorrow its the big alliances controlling the whole transport economic at your proposed 0.0 jump-in systems. Wake up.
SiJira	Posted - 2007.12.08 20:43:00 - [29] Originally by: Rells Originally by: SiJira no one likes your short term solution either its worse than the last one Clearly you are incorrect as several have said they like it. So your absolute "no one" is just preposterous from this very thread if you had bothered to read it. Second of all the short term solution would merely restore the market hub to be usable which it isnt now. But then you just try to be flippant and snide and offer no solutions of your own. Your choice but narrow minded and a useless post except to bump the thread. ammend it to people that have any idea what this game is about or how a small thing like a courier interacts with the rest of the game it is sad that i had to spell that out for you ____ __ ________ _sig below_ devs and gms cant modify my sig if they tried! _lies above_ CCP Morpheus was here Morpheus Fails. You need colors!! -Kaemonn [yellow]Kaem
Matthew Caldari BloodStar Technologies	Posted - 2007.12.08 21:10:00 - [30] You also have to consider that different activities generate vastly different loads on the node. Sitting in Jita IV-4 working the market generates almost zero load on the Jita node, the majority of the load of that is on the Forge region market node. And as the market doesn't lag noticeably in other areas of the Forge region, it's reasonable to conclude that the market system is nowhere near it's capacity. Also, even if there viable alternative routes, the autopilot often picks the route through Jita anyway. I certainly know that whenever I set a course to somewhere south of Jita from Lonetrek, it usually tries to take me through Jita. Many people will be flying through Jita for no other reason that their autopilot has told them that that's the way to their destination. Yes, they could fly round manually, but as I'm sure your macro psychology will tell you, the majority will not do that, and will just follow the autopilot like sheep. Again, adding Jita bypass gates would mean the autopilot never took you into Jita unless that was your specific destination (and would likely be easier than trying to hack in a custom bias against Jita into the pathfinding algorithm). Session-changes and blobs in space are the two things known to generate a lot of server load. The constant blob outside the IV-4 station is particularly bad for this, as it combines the two to give a session-change into a blob. Even worse, it's a blob with a very high rate of collisions. If those collisions load the server anything like the way they spam the logserver, then that's going to be a significant load too. Sorting out the undocking mechanism to spread ships out more would allow them to warp away faster and keep the crowding to a minimum. Similarly, putting in a Jita bypass would not only avoid unnecessary session changes on the Jita node, it would also reduce the crowding at the gates. There is still a lot that can be done to ensure that traffic in Jita is solely that of it's trade hub function. Those options should be exhausted before heavy-handed market distortions are considered. ------- There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines.
Sakura Nihil Stimulus	Posted - 2007.12.08 21:17:00 - [31] You could always restructure its highways, like Yulai . Say no to knee-jerk additions and nerfs, mmkay?
Disco Baby	Posted - 2007.12.08 21:31:00 - [32] i like the long term solution /signed.
SiJira	Posted - 2007.12.08 21:47:00 - [33] Originally by: Matthew Originally by: Rells Short Term For the time being make all stations in Jita and all stations within a jump of Jita in the forge deliver all purchased items from jita to the buyer in their station. This will allow people to spread out. Hot patch this so we can use the major market hub. About the only idea in the post I have any support for. As it's not possible to spread Jita to multiple nodes, the population needs to be spread to multiple systems. This is the most elegant way to do that. its the most elegant way to kill a part of the game ____ __ ________ _sig below_ devs and gms cant modify my sig if they tried! _lies above_ CCP Morpheus was here Morpheus Fails. You need colors!! -Kaemonn [yellow]Kaem
Matthew Caldari BloodStar Technologies	Posted - 2007.12.08 21:53:00 - [34] Originally by: SiJira Originally by: Matthew Originally by: Rells Short Term For the time being make all stations in Jita and all stations within a jump of Jita in the forge deliver all purchased items from jita to the buyer in their station. This will allow people to spread out. Hot patch this so we can use the major market hub. About the only idea in the post I have any support for. As it's not possible to spread Jita to multiple nodes, the population needs to be spread to multiple systems. This is the most elegant way to do that. its the most elegant way to kill a part of the game The problem with making it a player-hauling service is that it does not remove the need for players to be in Jita, and to be jumping in and out of it. And as I said, all other options should be exhausted before it is considered, which they have not yet been. And if it were to be introduced, it should be limited to the bare minimum necessary, such as it being only for Jita, and only shipping to 1 jump around Jita. Yes, it would nerf the current quick-win business of shuttling stuff between Jita and it's surrounding systems (sobaseki in particular as it is "hidden" by a market region boundary), but it would do nothing to nerf trade between hubs and more generally within the universe. It's not a nice solution, it's just the least undesirable of the options presented. ------- There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines.
Sabatashi	Posted - 2007.12.08 21:55:00 - [35] I wonder what kind of server is running JITA? Quick short Term: MORE POWER!
SiJira	Posted - 2007.12.08 21:58:00 - [36] Originally by: Matthew Originally by: SiJira its the most elegant way to kill a part of the game The problem with making it a player-hauling service is that it does not remove the need for players to be in Jita, and to be jumping in and out of it. And as I said, all other options should be exhausted before it is considered, which they have not yet been. And if it were to be introduced, it should be limited to the bare minimum necessary, such as it being only for Jita, and only shipping to 1 jump around Jita. Yes, it would nerf the current quick-win business of shuttling stuff between Jita and it's surrounding systems (sobaseki in particular as it is "hidden" by a market region boundary), but it would do nothing to nerf trade between hubs and more generally within the universe. It's not a nice solution, it's just the least undesirable of the options presented. you just killed your idea more effectively than i ever could remember that the less people go to jita while still using the jita markekt without providing an alternative only means that more other people will go there because of reduced lag this gamebreaker is not a solution its only another problem ____ __ ________ _sig below_ devs and gms cant modify my sig if they tried! _lies above_ CCP Morpheus was here Morpheus Fails. You need colors!! -Kaemonn [yellow]Kaem
Lord MuffloN Caldari Aggressive Tendencies Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2007.12.08 22:00:00 - [37] I've always liked the idea to have a constellation split on 3-5 systems with extra hard gate security and a maximum amount of sell orders/contracts in all those systems but other bonuses like lower fees, stargates to all those systems in the constellation in all the systems there, making suicide ganking a little bit harder, but also more frequent opportunities for it. Originally by: Jago Kain If they ever decide to award a Nobel Prize for Emo, Lord MuffloN is a sure fire winner of the first on
Matthew Caldari BloodStar Technologies	Posted - 2007.12.08 22:15:00 - [38] Originally by: SiJira remember that the less people go to jita while still using the jita markekt without providing an alternative only means that more other people will go there because of reduced lag That applies to any and every solution that moves anything out of Jita. If you force market orders out of Jita, they will not move any further away than they have to. Which means Niyabainen, Perimeter, Ikuchi and New Caldari. You will never remove the mega-hub clustered around Jita. Any and all methods to do so will either "do a Yulai" and just move the problem to a different system, or distribute the load over the systems surrounding Jita. The trouble is that any method to distribute the hub over multiple systems will generate a large amount of intra-hub traffic unless there is a unified market, including delivery. As it is at the moment, a large volume of trade occurs in IV-4 without the goods ever leaving that station. You start breaking that up over the surrounding systems and it will generate a massive amount of traffic, which is entirely counter-productive. And again, I say that I do not like this idea, it's a case of the least bad option, rather than an option I like. It would be far better if CCP can get the infiniband clustering and system node-spanning working in a reasonable timeframe. Once that is in, these game-mechanic hack solutions will be irrelevant, because Jita could then be spanned over multiple nodes. Coupled with a solution for undocking port congestion, this would allow Jita to handle pretty much whatever load was required, provided enough nodes are available. If a game-mechanic hack is needed to tide us over until they get that working, then the auto-delivery option is the least disruptive, and the easiest to take out again once it is no longer needed. ------- There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines.
SiJira	Posted - 2007.12.08 22:50:00 - [39] the thing is most things that get added out of necessity or by accident tend to stay for far too long if you think its such a bad idea give some better ones? how about a special tutorial on couriering? ____ __ ________ _sig below_ devs and gms cant modify my sig if they tried! _lies above_ CCP Morpheus was here Morpheus Fails. You need colors!! -Kaemonn [yellow]Kaem
NocturnalDeath Umbra Congregatio Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.12.08 22:53:00 - [40] Edited by: NocturnalDeath on 08/12/2007 22:53:42 I agree with all of OP's suggestions. To all that used the word/s "lemming" or "don't go to Jita", please don't post in Jita threads, you're lack of intelligence isn't helping. Now if there were only a solution to lag when you get 800 people in a fleet battle. Whiner: "OMG CCP will lose 90% of playerbase with this nerf!" Me: "Thank God, less lag for me then!" Whiner: "But prices of ships will double!" Me: "Sweet, ships are too cheap anyways!"
SiJira	Posted - 2007.12.08 23:08:00 - [41] Originally by: NocturnalDeath Now if there were only a solution to lag when you get 800 people in a fleet battle. this is cache extreme a trinity lag reducing mechanic used by leet players usually assigned to ram - although im told they dont tank very well ____ __ ________ _sig below_ devs and gms cant modify my sig if they tried! _lies above_ CCP Morpheus was here Morpheus Fails. You need colors!! -Kaemonn [yellow]Kaem
Sakura Nihil Stimulus	Posted - 2007.12.08 23:27:00 - [42] Originally by: NocturnalDeath To all that used the word/s "lemming" or "don't go to Jita", please don't post in Jita threads, you're lack of intelligence isn't helping. Nice troll . Say no to knee-jerk additions and nerfs, mmkay?
Antskyeeh Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2007.12.08 23:40:00 - [43] Rells, your middle idea is great. It fits in with CCP's needs to provide a fictional reason behind gameplay changes. There are many players trading on tiny margins, and increasing their costs will cause them to find new business models and perhaps move away. If a tax is associated with a system, then the total number of orders occurring in Jita will go down (across all the stations) and that will cause players to shop elsewhere. I would like to see a "trade hub of systems" grow up that is not just one system. I already sell items in New Caldari etc. because it is one jump away from Jita, and I get lots of traffic because people clearly equate trips to Jita with lots of choice, good prices and horrible delays. The systems that are 1 jump from Jita are known to the more experienced players and they appreciate not having to go to Jita. There are also some more mechanical ways to reduce population in that system, though they're usually more difficult to justify fictionally. CCP already got rid of all the agents and asteroid belts in Jita earlier in 2007. Consider these - Implement a limit to the number of players that can get docking clearance in a station. (doesn't affect you if you're already in the station) CCP would apply this firstly to 4-4-CNAP. The computer voice says "docking requested" right? It's time to come up with another response, other than "docking request accepted." "Docking request denied, orbiting station" (where you simply orbit 4-4-CNAP when it is full) would certainly cause them to think twice about buying anything there. Ships who are denied docking clearance are protected from attack for 30 seconds. Somehow (fictionally) one or more of the gates to/from Jita fail. Jita already has 7 or 8 gates, the most in the game; it could be time to reduce that by one. Which one gets shut down? CCP would have to think carefully about that of course. Limit the number of offices in the system. Don't know if that's totally fair as you could be in a NPC corp and not be affected, but perhaps raising the cost of offices continually until some start to drop off might reduce the amount of trade orders in the system. Change the reprocessing base yield from 50% to something closer to 30% in all Jita stations. Raise ISK/hr manufacturing costs, copying costs etc.. Somehow limit battles occurring in Jita... have a "warp scrambling inhibitor field" around all stations... or a "capacitor drain phenomenon" that only affects ships firing weapons. Maybe that's a whole can of worms in itself (maybe even would INCREASE traffic since you are ecouraging p[layers to seek safe haven)... but it seems like a lot of players go to Jita to gank on other players carrying goods to sell or that they've just bought. Seems like taxation at a local, system-wide level is enough to dampen enthusiasm for any system.
Reshina Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.12.09 00:42:00 - [44] You pretty much had to guess that the die hard carebears would flock to troll the idea. The fact is that they dont want to have any changes except to scream "see no evil" in trying to say jita isnt a problem or to scream at CCP to throw more hardware at it (which accomplishes little). The 0.0 pilots are much more used to solving problems and having to take actions doing it. THe carebears just want to do their AFK freighter hauling. Its a little disturbing. The reality is that Jita is and has been one of the most significant problems in the game. I dont like the short term solution but it wil suffice for a short time. The long term solution is designed to use economic pressure to spread out the load. Originally by: Matthew Originally by: Rells Long Term Solution Make broker fees scale up depending upon the number of orders in the station. When you put in a new sell order, the broker fees will be proportionate to the number of orders in the system to the point where they are 100% or more of the order theoretically. Keep in mind that broker fees in practice will never get to that level because people in the market will spread out when they get too expensive. This will make it too expensive to put in an order in a station that is already flooded. This makes sense as a station should have finite amount of space. This is effectively achieving your short-term solution via an economic pressure instead of a delivery service. I'm assuming you are proposing removing the delivery service again at this point, as having the two systems running concurrently would be a bit pointless. The main disadvantage of the fees approach is that it spreads the orders out as well as the players. The taxes won't force the orders any further away from Jita than they absolutely have to be. So instead of Jita, there will be a blob hub of Ikuchi, Perimeter, Niyabainen and New Caldari. While this spreads out the load, it also means that many shoppers will be forced to make multiple stops in different systems to get everything they need. This will significantly push up the server load due to session changes (which are the single highest-load activity an individual player can perform). The point is that it will spread out the load. THe goal is not to make it so more lazy people can shop easier but to remove the problem of a single system wehere people get stuck in lag bombs all the time. Getting it spread out from jita is the point. If poeple cant make the TRIVIAL adaptation to make a few stops then they should quit and go back to Playing WOW where everyhthing is designed to be causal and easy. Im so tired of LAZY .. UNBELIEVABLY LAZY carebears driving things in the game.
SiJira	Posted - 2007.12.09 00:46:00 - [45] it will also ruin trading think your ideas through or you will keep getting shot down ____ __ ________ _sig below_ devs and gms cant modify my sig if they tried! _lies above_ CCP Morpheus was here Morpheus Fails. You need colors!! -Kaemonn [yellow]Kaem
Matthew Caldari BloodStar Technologies	Posted - 2007.12.09 15:22:00 - [46] Originally by: SiJira if you think its such a bad idea give some better ones? I already did - get the inifiband clustering working. It would be preferable to avoid the need for a gameplay hack altogether. If I had a better idea for a gameplay hack, I would have suggested it. Unfortunately, part of life is accepting that sometimes there is no ideal solution. Originally by: SiJira how about a special tutorial on couriering? The trouble is that couriering is possibly even more boring than mining, at least when done on the purely high-sec runs that Jita couriering would likely involve. And it's not a complicated thing to learn how to do. The real issue with couriering isn't that people don't know how to do it, but that people do not want to employ them. Many players do not place value on the time it takes them to travel to and from Jita to buy stuff. Part of that is simple ignorance that a "time is money" tutorial might fix (though having recently sat in rookie help with a new char, the tutorials seem to pass a lot of new players by). But part of it is also because many players can make the journey on autopilot using "junk" time in which they would not have been able to play properly anyway. e.g. get home from work, log in, set autopilot. Go make& eat dinner, come back to find yourself in Jita, dock up, buy stuff, set autopilot home, do washing up, set laundry going, put out garbage, come back to find your char back home and ready for your evenings proper playing. Originally by: SiJira Originally by: NocturnalDeath Now if there were only a solution to lag when you get 800 people in a fleet battle. this is cache extreme a trinity lag reducing mechanic used by leet players usually assigned to ram - although im told they dont tank very well That will help with your client's frame rate, but will do nothing to help if the server node is so overloaded that it takes 5 minutes for it to acknowledge your module activation. Originally by: Antskyeeh Implement a limit to the number of players that can get docking clearance in a station. (doesn't affect you if you're already in the station) CCP would apply this firstly to 4-4-CNAP. The computer voice says "docking requested" right? It's time to come up with another response, other than "docking request accepted." "Docking request denied, orbiting station" (where you simply orbit 4-4-CNAP when it is full) would certainly cause them to think twice about buying anything there. Ships who are denied docking clearance are protected from attack for 30 seconds. It's actually far better from a server load point of view to get them into the station as fast as possible. A player in a station has but one interaction with the other people there - the Guests list. Which is simply a single name update when someone enters or leaves the station. A player outside the station needs to be updated on every single ship and object on that grid on a continual basis, and needs to have the full in-space simulation running for them. Stacking them up outside the station would actually make lag far, far worse. Now, if you flip it round to make it a queue for undocking, to avoid the massive bump-fest that undocking from IV-4 is, then you might be able to work up an idea. Incidentally, we've had queues to get into Jita before, back when the jumping queue was implemented. It didn't stop people going there, it just meant that you had entire fleets stacked up on the gates into Jita, and the surrounding systems became unplayable as well. Originally by: Antskyeeh Somehow (fictionally) one or more of the gates to/from Jita fail. Jita already has 7 or 8 gates, the most in the game; it could be time to reduce that by one. Which one gets shut down? CCP would have to think carefully about that of course. Either that would have no effect and people would just go round to one of the gates still left. Or it would "Do a Yulai" and just move the hub activity to a different system without solving the problem. ------- There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines.
Matthew Caldari BloodStar Technologies	Posted - 2007.12.09 15:24:00 - [47] Originally by: Antskyeeh Limit the number of offices in the system. Don't know if that's totally fair as you could be in a NPC corp and not be affected, but perhaps raising the cost of offices continually until some start to drop off might reduce the amount of trade orders in the system. There already is a limit to the number of offices in the system, and the rents already do scale with demand. Jita offices are already ridiculously oversubscribed with astronomical rents, and it isn't putting a dampener on anything. Originally by: Reshina The point is that it will spread out the load. THe goal is not to make it so more lazy people can shop easier but to remove the problem of a single system wehere people get stuck in lag bombs all the time. Getting it spread out from jita is the point. If poeple cant make the TRIVIAL adaptation to make a few stops then they should quit and go back to Playing WOW where everyhthing is designed to be causal and easy. Im so tired of LAZY .. UNBELIEVABLY LAZY carebears driving things in the game. But in spreading out the load it will generate a lot more load as well. This is not about being lazy, it's about whether the change will achieve the effect you want. I couldn't care less if I have to visit New Caldari, Niyabainen, Perimeter and Jita to buy what I used to get just from Jita. What I do care about is that that's potentially 10 extra session changes that I would not currently have to make. Which is a significant extra load on the server. Not to mention all the intra-hub trading that currently happens in the IV-4 station without requiring any sessions changes at all would then need loads and loads of them as people haul between the systems. If you spread the load over 3 systems, but all those extra session changes increase the server load by 3 times, then you will be no better off than you are now. You'll just have 3 systems lagging to hell instead of one. ------- There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines.
SiJira	Posted - 2007.12.09 15:34:00 - [48] Originally by: Matthew I already did and its a bad idea Originally by: SiJira how about a special tutorial on couriering? Originally by: Matthew The trouble is that couriering is possibly even more boring than mining and yet so many people go mining that there are mining ops for many corps and even mining only corps many of which house main characters Originally by: Matthew Originally by: SiJira Originally by: NocturnalDeath Now if there were only a solution to lag when you get 800 people in a fleet battle. this is cache extreme a trinity lag reducing mechanic used by leet players usually assigned to ram - although im told they dont tank very well That will help with your client's frame rate, but will do nothing to help if the server node is so overloaded that it takes 5 minutes for it to acknowledge your module activation. now the server does not need to send you the graphics for everything when you join a fleet battle - it was designed primarily for fleet battles ____ __ ________ _sig below_ devs and gms cant modify my sig if they tried! _lies above_ CCP Morpheus was here Morpheus Fails. You need colors!! -Kaemonn [yellow]Kaem
Agguire	Posted - 2007.12.09 15:36:00 - [49] Anything to reduce lag in Jita will make more people want to go to Jita. If anything the lag should be increased. No one should want to go to Jita. Empire is big spread out the trading.
BoboTheClown	Posted - 2007.12.09 15:38:00 - [50] Just have a supernova and say the system was destroyed problem solved
Matthew Caldari BloodStar Technologies	Posted - 2007.12.09 17:53:00 - [51] Originally by: SiJira Originally by: Matthew I already did and its a bad idea Upgrading the server to eliminate the single biggest load-balancing issue is a bad idea? Originally by: SiJira how about a special tutorial on couriering? Originally by: Matthew The trouble is that couriering is possibly even more boring than mining and yet so many people go mining that there are mining ops for many corps and even mining only corps many of which house main characters However, there is always a significant demand for minerals, hence a significant demand for mining. There is not the same demand for couriers, for reasons which I have already gone into detail in the two paragraphs following the one you quoted, which you have conveniently ignored, and which would not be changed by a nerfing of Jita. Originally by: SiJira now the server does not need to send you the graphics for everything when you join a fleet battle - it was designed primarily for fleet battles The server never sent you graphics for everything. If it did, the bandwidth usage of eve would be truly ridiculous. It only ever told you what items were there, the graphics assets for the items were always a part of the local client install, they were never loaded from the server on-demand. The Trinity client made two changes which do improve loading the graphics on the local client: 1) In-ram Caching. This keeps previously loaded models/textures etc in RAM, meaning they can be retrieved faster if they need to be used again. 2) asynchronous loading. This means that if the model/texture isn't loaded yet, the graphics engine won't wait for it, it'll just render the scene and that item won't have a graphic. Slower systems running the premium content can see this in operation already when undocking etc - usually you'll see your ship first, then the station will pop into existence a second or two later (though you could still select it from it's in-space icon or the overview before the model has loaded). The server still needs to send you just as much as it did before, but the client just handles being flooded with loads of stuff better than it did before. ------- There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines.
Liam Liam	Posted - 2007.12.10 09:41:00 - [52] Short term 1. Remove everything from Jitta that can be removed and place them elsewhere eg: Belts agents reduce Jitta to one station 2. Build a bypass so anyone not wanting to enter Jitta can access other systems without going through Jitta 3.Going through a Jitta gate puts you directly in station 4. Insta kill guns on gates connecting to Jitta with sytem wide range so there'll be no lag causing ganks Long term Make Jitta a true trade hub ie: split it into at least 4 interdependent systems ( may appear as one to the user )... ..this will allow the devs to allocate more than one server to Jitta But also do the same for one or two more hubs encouraging people to spread out have highway warp gates connecting to faraway systems to reduce the amount of jumps people have to do to get there ( Will reduce lag generally )

Pages: 1 2 :: [one 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.