|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Katabrok First
Caldari Asguard Security Service Angels Of Discord
|
Posted - 2008.02.24 04:08:00 -
[1]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis This is actually a change Tuxford was considering making. Where the turret type and target id are the same to treat them as one volley and one hit calculation as an optimisation.
There are a few issues with that though as your only performing one hit result per turret battery instead of six which can lead to much higher variable alpha and damage over time. I am hazarding a guess it is reasons along these lines we have not seen it implemented yet but I'll try to ambush Tuxford on monday and ask more about it.
It doesn't need to be a problem. The real problem is the report of so many streams of information to each participant in the fight at different times. If you use salvos, you can still calculate the damage done by each gun, but the propagation of the results are made on one big lump, so everyone involved only receive 1 notification instead of 8 notifications.
I see it this way today:
1 - Player A shoots player B with the first gun in his rack. 2 - Player A's client sends to the server the information about the shot 3 - The server calculates the damage done to player B's ship 4 - The server sends this information to everyone who's eligible to know player B's ship status 5 - All of it repeats to the other guns of player A
It could be done this way:
1 - Player A fires a salvo at player B 2 - Player A's client sends to the server the information about the salvo 3 - The server calculates the amount of damage done by each gun on the salvo 4 - The server sends the damage information of each shot in the salvo to player A and B in one comunication 5 - The server sends to everyone else who has a need to know the health of player B's ship the total amount of health subtracted
Voila!!! The amount of damage done is still calculated in the same way, and the amount of information flying everywhere drops by a factor of 6 - 8 times (6 to 8 guns, i'm good at math)
Kata
Uma vez flamengo, sempre flamengo. |
Katabrok First
Caldari Asguard Security Service Angels Of Discord
|
Posted - 2008.02.26 16:41:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Linda Mei Edited by: Linda Mei on 26/02/2008 01:20:17
Originally by: Mini Mizer
no thanks - for the salvo where all would hit or all might miss.
I believe the idea is to calculate all the turrets hits in the client side. Some will hit and some wont just like it happens now. It sums up the ones that do hit and send the information to the server.
The only difference is that the turrets/missiles will have to be synchronized to attack the target at the same time to do the salvo calculations.
They wont perform as a single hit-or-miss super doomsday weapon. I dont want that either!!!
Didn't you read my solution above? If we do it as I said, the calculation would be the same, so your damage would not change, only the amount of net traffic that would be different.
Kata
Uma vez flamengo, sempre flamengo. |
Katabrok First
Caldari Asguard Security Service Angels Of Discord
|
Posted - 2008.02.26 17:14:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Lirt Point is that way you get same damage on every turret, so how can this be balanced? For example missiles do same damage on every target so maybe missiles can easily get this kind of grouping but if turrets get it also then thats a balance issue...
I edited my post to convey exactly what I meant, it's the part in italics. Sorry if I wasn't all clear, but english is my second language.
Kata
Uma vez flamengo, sempre flamengo. |
Katabrok First
Caldari Asguard Security Service Angels Of Discord
|
Posted - 2008.02.27 16:43:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Linda Mei Edited by: Linda Mei on 26/02/2008 18:30:28
Originally by: Katabrok First Didn't you read my solution above? If we do it as I said, the calculation would be the same, so your damage would not change, only the amount of net traffic that would be different.
I think you quoted the wrong person. I was trying to explain Mini Mizer the EXACLY same thing you previous wrote!
I am on your side! LOL
Sorry!!! Fast posting, wrong quote!!!! HHEHEHEHEHHEHE
Kata
Uma vez flamengo, sempre flamengo. |
|
|
|