EVE Search - CCP....grab the money and run

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

CCP....grab the money and run

» 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)
Tarminic Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand	Posted - 2008.02.12 19:10:00 - [61] Originally by: ARGH69 Originally by: Tarminic Originally by: ARGH69 the fix is simple. they need to deploy the quad core xeon servers. i remember when they upgraded to the current dual core AMD blade servers and the lag was "fixed". now the lag is as bad as it was right before the previous server hardware upgrade. the hardware upgrade lasted one year before lag started rearing it's ugly head again. instead of sitting on the profits, ccp needs to upgrade the server hardware every year at the current pace of game population expansion. the game mechanics does not allow any other solution. How would that help? Only one core could run a system at any one time... what do you mean how would that help?..... how did going from single core to dual core help when they upgraded the servers 2 years ago?..... it's not our job to find out what they did or how their game is coded. we only want a lag-free game experience. the only way this is achievable is through server hardware upgrades like history has shown. True, but the biggest problem is that a server node can only be run on a single core, and instead of the speed of a single core increasing based on Moore's Law (which CCP was counting on), they have increased by adding multiple cores, which CCP's server architecture isn't capable of taking advantage of yet. That's why they're working on using Infiniband. Quote: this whole need for speed initiative has turned into the need for speed bumps instead with the elimination of alot of features that were once standard. deletion of belts in jita and other places? re-routing of nearby jita systems? wallet delayed transactions? can't scan this, can't scan that anymore?.....what worthless initiative this has turned out to be because lag is as bad as ever, and even worse. I agree, but how do you know that lag wouldn't be worse without the changes you mentioned? ---------------- Tarminic - 32 Million SP in Forum Warfare Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.78.3 (NEW VERSION!)
Troyd23	Posted - 2008.02.12 19:13:00 - [62] Originally by: baltec1 People who whine and complain about laggy mega blobs need to give themselves a slap. Very few games will let 200 people fight it out without game stopping lag let alone 400-500. Most of the lag is caused by crappy computers and bad connections on the players side. This is why I can wander around jita while others are crashing and getting stuck. CCP have said they are working on it and no ammount of complaining and insults is going to make it go any faster. I'm new...but ive always wondered what the big deal with jita was... i fly in.. fly around dock with a station, do my thing, undock and leave. Usually with little to no lag, minus the marke screen...that thing has a horrendus load time! The only real trouble I have is with the massive amount of people who are sitting just outside of the undock area.. Forcing me to manually fly out of their way in order to warpout. Otherwise i get stuck in one of those endless warp cycles where your ship just kinda bumps into things. But on the Server lag issue as a whole, i think we should just wait for the infiniband to come online and then judge CCP's service. If they manage to significantly upgrade the amount each node can handle. Then well they deserve some credit, and less bashing.
Tarminic Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand	Posted - 2008.02.12 19:16:00 - [63] Originally by: Troyd23 But on the Server lag issue as a whole, i think we should just wait for the infiniband to come online and then judge CCP's service. If they manage to significantly upgrade the amount each node can handle. Then well they deserve some credit, and less bashing. If you tread through this forum's history you'll see people commenting on server upgrades before and their responses have been overwhelmingly positive. There was a time (before I joined EVE) that a battle with 50 people would lag as much as a battle with 400 people. And yet people constantly claim that "the lag has never gotten any better." I think that some people just need something to complain about and don't really care if their issue has an explanation that doesn't line up with their disposition to blame everything on authority (the authority being CCP in this case). I just ignore them when I can. ---------------- Tarminic - 32 Million SP in Forum Warfare Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.78.3 (NEW VERSION!)
Daelin Blackleaf	Posted - 2008.02.12 19:17:00 - [64] Originally by: Dristra Originally by: Anna Avarice Originally by: Kahega Amielden Yes, and if a node could support 2500 players lag free, 5500 would try to join This. 35,000 players on-line. Approximately 80% of them being in empire leaves around 7000 players in 0.0. If a node could support 2500 players then you'd need to bring almost half of the 0.0 population to a single node to make it a problem. If a node could support 1000 players I still doubt we'd surpass it any time in the next few years, 0.0 simply doesn't have the manpower. I'm no technical guru, I just wanted to point out the minor detail that the residents of 0.0 are not infinite and in theory it would be feasible to just throw hardware at it. Though of course a better and likely cheaper option would be to have the system assign resources based on how many pilots are in a given area.
Jenny Spitfire Caldari Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2008.02.12 19:20:00 - [65] I wunder, why is it not posible to put 1 server for 1 system? That would fix lag for all, wuoldn't it? Servers is not veri expensive, isn't it? --------- Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria! Recruitment -KB-
Angel DeMorphis Gallente	Posted - 2008.02.12 19:33:00 - [66] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire I wunder, why is it not posible to put 1 server for 1 system? That would fix lag for all, wuoldn't it? Servers is not veri expensive, isn't it? Yes, you are talking about expensive hardware. I don't know the real numbers, but it's something like going from 250 servers to 5000 servers. Think about it. My sig taken from this site. [IMAGE REMOVED]
Jenny Spitfire Caldari Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2008.02.12 19:34:00 - [67] But 5000 servers is liek less than a year's porfit ... and customers is satify too ... --------- Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria! Recruitment -KB-
ARGH69	Posted - 2008.02.12 19:38:00 - [68] Originally by: Tarminic Originally by: ARGH69 Originally by: Tarminic Originally by: ARGH69 the fix is simple. they need to deploy the quad core xeon servers. i remember when they upgraded to the current dual core AMD blade servers and the lag was "fixed". now the lag is as bad as it was right before the previous server hardware upgrade. the hardware upgrade lasted one year before lag started rearing it's ugly head again. instead of sitting on the profits, ccp needs to upgrade the server hardware every year at the current pace of game population expansion. the game mechanics does not allow any other solution. How would that help? Only one core could run a system at any one time... what do you mean how would that help?..... how did going from single core to dual core help when they upgraded the servers 2 years ago?..... it's not our job to find out what they did or how their game is coded. we only want a lag-free game experience. the only way this is achievable is through server hardware upgrades like history has shown. True, but the biggest problem is that a server node can only be run on a single core, and instead of the speed of a single core increasing based on Moore's Law (which CCP was counting on), they have increased by adding multiple cores, which CCP's server architecture isn't capable of taking advantage of yet. That's why they're working on using Infiniband. Quote: this whole need for speed initiative has turned into the need for speed bumps instead with the elimination of alot of features that were once standard. deletion of belts in jita and other places? re-routing of nearby jita systems? wallet delayed transactions? can't scan this, can't scan that anymore?.....what worthless initiative this has turned out to be because lag is as bad as ever, and even worse. I agree, but how do you know that lag wouldn't be worse without the changes you mentioned? then they need to fix this problem by having nodes that can operate on multiple cores. why fight the progression of hardware technology? they should be adapting to fit with it. the future is multicore application support whether they like it or not. instead of pulling out a magic wand from their a$$ and shoving it into ours they should get their so-very-smart coders working on optimizing their servers for multi-core support. this infiband or whatever it is sounds like empty promises. use the damn technology at your disposal already!
Malcanis R.E.C.O.N. Black-Out	Posted - 2008.02.12 19:54:00 - [69] "instead of pulling out a magic wand from their a$$ and shoving it into ours they should get their so-very-smart coders working on optimizing their servers for multi-core support. this infiband or whatever it is sounds like empty promises. use the damn technology at your disposal already!" This is not a trivial undertaking. It's a lot harder than just "set lag=0" or "set threads=many" CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.
Angel DeMorphis Gallente	Posted - 2008.02.12 19:58:00 - [70] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire But 5000 servers is liek less than a year's porfit ... and customers is satify too ... lol, yer funny. You think CCP makes 5 Bil a year? We're talking dollars or Euros here, not ISK. Even then, you'd not be feeding any of the developers and their families, or paying their electric bill. My sig taken from this site. [IMAGE REMOVED]
Tarminic Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand	Posted - 2008.02.12 20:08:00 - [71] Originally by: ARGH69 then they need to fix this problem by having nodes that can operate on multiple cores. why fight the progression of hardware technology? they should be adapting to fit with it. the future is multicore application support whether they like it or not. instead of pulling out a magic wand from their a$$ and shoving it into ours they should get their so-very-smart coders working on optimizing their servers for multi-core support. this infiband or whatever it is sounds like empty promises. use the damn technology at your disposal already! I really don't understand what you're talking about - you're suggesting that CCP won't upgrade their hardware or optimize their code, just remove features. CCP is already doing the things that you're talking about. But it takes longer than a month. ---------------- Tarminic - 32 Million SP in Forum Warfare Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.78.3 (NEW VERSION!)
Jenny Spitfire Caldari Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2008.02.12 20:26:00 - [72] Angel ... but ... CCP eans like 3M a month ... and 5000 new servers is liked 5M a oder ... They still like making porfit ... and it do not look like expansive to buy ... --------- Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria! Recruitment -KB-
Angel DeMorphis Gallente	Posted - 2008.02.12 20:34:00 - [73] Edited by: Angel DeMorphis on 12/02/2008 20:35:29 Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Angel ... but ... CCP eans like 3M a month ... and 5000 new servers is liked 5M a oder ... They still like making porfit ... and it do not look like expansive to buy ... Try something on the order of 1 Million for a supercomputer, and you'll be closer to the truth. These things do cost money. 1 Mil * 5,000 = 5 Bil. And just because CCP pulls in 3 Mil a month, doesn't mean that's how much extra they have. That goes to the pay our dear developers and GMs, as well as pay for electricity for their offices/server rooms. But don't believe me, see it from a Devs mouth: Linkage EDIT: Also, earlier in the same thread: Linkage My sig taken from this site. [IMAGE REMOVED]
Jenny Spitfire Caldari Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2008.02.12 20:35:00 - [74] 1M for one server? Is is rael? ... --------- Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria! Recruitment -KB-
Angel DeMorphis Gallente	Posted - 2008.02.12 20:38:00 - [75] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire 1M for one server? Is is rael? ... I was throwing a number out there, from what I've seen on the internet, and my experience at my own job. But yes, this isn't a souped-up personal computer we're talking about. My sig taken from this site. [IMAGE REMOVED]
Jenny Spitfire Caldari Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2008.02.12 20:42:00 - [76] Edited by: Jenny Spitfire on 12/02/2008 20:43:41 and 5000M for 5000 servers ... that is liek a lot of cash ... Mien PC costs like 1500 dolar ... and lol, it is like only 0.2% of a CCP server ... I feel so spesial that CCP do care about this game. They give us veri expansive and good hardware for our game. I raelly love this game and will never leave it. Maby I should go open a shop and build servers for CCP at a cheap prize. Everyone will be happy. --------- Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria! Recruitment -KB-
Angel DeMorphis Gallente	Posted - 2008.02.12 20:47:00 - [77] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Mien PC costs like 1500 dolar ... and lol, it is like only 0.2% of a CCP server ... Like I said, your PC is very cheap in comparison, lol. Not always a million (though the new IBM Gene, or whatever, is something like 1.5 Mil), but when I saw what my company was selling servers for (I've worked at two companies that sold servers) my eyes bugged and I figured they could afford to keep me around for a while longer (though that wasn't the truth :P). My sig taken from this site. [IMAGE REMOVED]
Jenny Spitfire Caldari Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2008.02.12 20:52:00 - [78] Still their one servers is like a few times more expansive than my PC and I really feel like I am in a very well acred game because CCP invest in very good servers. I am glad that I am an Eve palyer. I am very happy. --------- Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria! Recruitment -KB-
Darek Castigatus	Posted - 2008.02.12 21:10:00 - [79] funny thing that never seems to get considered by people who whine about stuff like Blobbing causing node crashes - A LARGE MAJORITY OF THE PLAYER BASE DOESNT DO THIS SORT OF STUFF. Biggest fight ive ever been in had around 15 people in it and that was fine. You really want to blame someone blame BoB for **ing off enough of EVE that they have 300-400 size fleets battering their territory 23/7. Ok maybe thats an oversimplification but CCP in my eyes are doing their absolute best to keep up with a situation which has gotten somewhat out of control. Also as many people have already said server upgrades are freakin expensive and take a **load of time to put into place. I'd say more but i cant be arsed
000Hunter000 Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2008.02.12 21:22:00 - [80] Yeah blame BoB!!! OR GOONS!! HELL BLAME EM BOTH!!! CCP, let us pay the online shop with Direct Debit!!!
7shining7one7 Quafe Paladins	Posted - 2008.02.12 22:33:00 - [81] to think that ccp is not doing the very best they can to make the game great is ridiculous. ofcourse they are, but it's not that easy, you don't just "fix" it like snapping your fingers and then it's done. if you think you can do it so much better, then please make an eve type game, i'm quite sure that if it was better you wouldn't have problems getting a player base! eve is quite a great game and sometimes i think ppl take for granted just how many toys ccp has actually given us to play with. the game is HUGE, there's a lot of data going around all the time, and it's not just updating ship positions and such. it's much more than that. i think in the future that goal with much less lag will be achieved, but for now, they are doing the best they can with what they got, give them a break.. it's not like the game is completely unplayable. and again i say, if you think you can do it much better, then make another game or apply for a job at ccp and "show them how big noobs they are at developing games". please do if you are so f'ing good.. i'm sure nobody would complain either if you "fixed" eve and you'd get a substantial salary if you could pull it off i can guarantee you that rofl
F'nog Amarr Celestial Horizon Corp. Valainaloce	Posted - 2008.02.13 07:19:00 - [82] Originally by: Tarminic Originally by: ARGH69 the fix is simple. they need to deploy the quad core xeon servers. i remember when they upgraded to the current dual core AMD blade servers and the lag was "fixed". now the lag is as bad as it was right before the previous server hardware upgrade. the hardware upgrade lasted one year before lag started rearing it's ugly head again. instead of sitting on the profits, ccp needs to upgrade the server hardware every year at the current pace of game population expansion. the game mechanics does not allow any other solution. How would that help? Only one core could run a system at any one time... Given the way the hardware works now, if they kept the same number of servers and doubled the cores on them, then most nodes would have fewer systems in them. So this would be a good upgrade for the average user. For fleet fights, Jita, and other major systems, nothing would change. Still it would be a general improvement, just not the most desirable one. Originally by: Kazuma Saruwatari F'nog for Amarr Emperor. Nuff said
tai shang Dominus Imperium	Posted - 2008.02.13 10:36:00 - [83] i too have been having problems with the clien crashing. Just now, it crashed on me twice within 2 minutes, and did the same earlier today as well. I came to check the forums to see if there was any helpfull information on whats been going on lately, as i have been hearing about this problem a lot with other players. But instead I find a winy little girl complaining that the server crashed and others complaining that the servers need upgrades and screw ambulation, etc. ect... So let me ask a honest question, and put urself in the scenario: u are in charge of fleet ops for your corp/alliance. u know that the servers will crash when 300+ people log in to one system. so you bring as many people to the fight as possible, trying to push the limit and put numbers on your side. then one day, CCP uprgades the servers, and now the limit is 400+. What are you going to do now? If YOU dont bring more people, your opponent WILL. BASIC large scale combat tactics. When the limit is raised, it WILL be tested. The only way to solve this problem is to stop blobbing. Even if CCP puts a limit on the size of a fleet, it will do no good because then players will just make multiple fleets. The only thing that could be done (or the only thing i can think of off hand), would be to put a limit on the amount of people that can enter one system at any given time. Like how public pools have a maximum capacity limit. But even then, you would just see hundreds of players in neighboring systems waiting for their turn in the que to enter the system, which would lag out the entire cluster. SO even then, problem not solved.
Kur'Dekaija Atomic Heroes Phalanx Alliance	Posted - 2008.02.13 13:10:00 - [84] dunno why ppl are whining, they are trying to make a the most powerful supercomputer in Europe with help from IBM and Microsoft... that ain't enough??

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.