| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
ceyriot
Crimson Rebellion
   |
Posted - 2008.03.07 00:14:00 -
[1]
Edited by: ceyriot on 07/03/2008 00:19:58
I know theres a lot of hating going around on lag.
But have all of you actually thought what it would take to run 800 people from all over the world?
At once?
In one grid?
Shooting at each other?
Not to mention about 5000 miniature versions of them doing the same thing?
Thats just one system. What about 30,000 or more people playing at once?
Think about it. Then ask yourself why there isn't more lag.
(If you're going to say i haven't been affected by lag, I've lost a hulk, raven and a mackinaw to lag)
|
Lord Evangelian
Gallente
LEAP Corp
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 00:41:00 -
[2]
The server used to lag with 100 people in system...
I have never experienced lag in jita or ours
I have been in a fleet battle and never experienced lag...
Im lucky I guess...
STop hating EVE and shouting at devs and think like OP said...
--------------------
|
Fader Bane
Black Knight Buccaneers
Daisho Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 00:49:00 -
[3]
The OP is correct, its in our imagination. We obviously aren't trying hard enough.
________________________________________
|
Patch86
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 00:56:00 -
[4]
AFAIK, the most recent TRI vs SK fight to die a laggy node-death was a 350 person affair. TRI invaded, and SK and friends launched their counter-attack.
There are 2 points here. 1) There was catastrophic node-crash lag at 300 people, not 800. Extremely irritating lag starts at much less people than that. 2) If a fleet of 150 people turn up in your home and start dismantling your POS's, what do you propose to do about it except form a fleet and go shoot at them?
Its all very well and good telling people not to have fleet fights unless they're happy with humongous lag, but the fact is that all of the CCP implemented features to do with 0.0 not only encourage but physically force people to fleet fight. This means people have 2 basic options- take part in expensive, node-crash battles, or write off the entire 0.0 portion of the game as unplayable. Does that sound like a decent status quo?
That is why people complain to the developers. The game is broken, and they want it fixed. If it can't be fixed for fundamental reasons, then the game clearly can't stay the way it is.
------
 Originally by: Dark Shikari
The problem with killing Jesus is he always just respawns 3 days later anyways.
|
Shadow Joy
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 01:03:00 -
[5]
The OP is right - I should be happy that my home town has over one hundred murders a year. It could easily be one thousand.
Or, you know, I could actually think. But then I might realize that the fact that things could be worse is no excuse for the current situation being bad.
|
OwlManAtt
Gallente
Yasashii Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 01:20:00 -
[6]
Do you expect Microsoft Excel to crash when you fill in a thousand cells? No?
If the software allows you to do something, it will be done. If it cannot handle something despite allowing you to do it, the software is broken. If somebody wants to put an end to bad performance, then cap the number of pilots allowed in a system until InfiniBand is deployed.
---
SVP OwlManAtt, Yasashii Syndicate |
Karyuudo Tydraad
Caldari
Whiskey Pete's Drycleaning Services
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 01:22:00 -
[7]
Originally by: OwlManAtt
cap the number of pilots allowed in a system until InfiniBand is deployed.
Do you really need someone to go through a blow-by-blow account of why that's a horrible idea that would destroy 0.0 warfare as we know it and forever empower the blob for you?
|
OwlManAtt
Gallente
Yasashii Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 02:11:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Karyuudo Tydraad
Originally by: OwlManAtt
cap the number of pilots allowed in a system until InfiniBand is deployed.
Do you really need someone to go through a blow-by-blow account of why that's a horrible idea that would destroy 0.0 warfare as we know it and forever empower the blob for you?
I know exactly what it would do. But, can you say that having the grid take an hour to load is somehow functional?
At least this way, you have a prayer of escaping when you're hopelessly outnumbered.
---
SVP OwlManAtt, Yasashii Syndicate |
Karyuudo Tydraad
Caldari
Whiskey Pete's Drycleaning Services
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 02:16:00 -
[9]
Originally by: OwlManAtt
Originally by: Karyuudo Tydraad
Originally by: OwlManAtt
cap the number of pilots allowed in a system until InfiniBand is deployed.
Do you really need someone to go through a blow-by-blow account of why that's a horrible idea that would destroy 0.0 warfare as we know it and forever empower the blob for you?
I know exactly what it would do. But, can you say that having the grid take an hour to load is somehow functional?
At least this way, you have a prayer of escaping when you're hopelessly outnumbered.
I'd say it's more functional than having an impossible defense by filling up the system to near its limit. Boundaries would freeze. Fleet battles would be unheard of. Fill up a system to 75-90% capacity and gank whatever is ballsy enough to leap into it. You'd have evenings of sitting on either side of a gate, in fleets too large to engage. Really, even a laggy semi-functional 0.0 slideshow is preferable to a complete shutdown of fleet battles.
Just leave your 0.0 alliance and fly around in small gangs if lag bothers you that much.
|
ceyriot
Crimson Rebellion
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 02:50:00 -
[10]
I'm not trying to say "stop fighting i h8 lag"...Give the server some love, you can't expect it to do everything you want it to do.
|
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 02:56:00 -
[11]
make sure you have enough stront in your towers that you can take 150 of your own guys and go shoot their poses instead 
|
ceyriot
Crimson Rebellion
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 04:20:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton
make sure you have enough stront in your towers that you can take 150 of your own guys and go shoot their poses instead
is this even relevant?
|
Kendar
Gallente
4S Corporation
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 11:23:00 -
[13]
There will always be lag.. as soon as ccp manage to run 300 in fleetfight with no lag the players will drop 300 more into the fight
its evil and its here to stay
|
Viryana
Genco
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 11:29:00 -
[14]
Problem is the majority of people don't even know what lag even is.
All you need is, to put it in a nutshell, moar internets. I have lots of internets and a really nice amount of ram and - yes you guessed it - I don't lag in Jita 
|
Zerena Draco
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:21:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Viryana
Problem is the majority of people don't even know what lag even is.
All you need is, to put it in a nutshell, moar internets. I have lots of internets and a really nice amount of ram and - yes you guessed it - I don't lag in Jita
Nice lie ...
Even with 1GB in your bandwith up/down wont matter if the node is lagged. Jita in primehours will freeze the best comp with the best bandwith...
Why ?
Because the node cant handle giving/taking information on all actions being made.
|
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:46:00 -
[16]
Originally by: OwlManAtt
If the software allows you to do something, it will be done. If it cannot handle something despite allowing you to do it, the software is broken.
Too true, if you allow players to do something, then players are going to do it. Players are going to do whatever they have to do to win. Right now the best strategy is to blob and blob bigger than the other guy and blob first.
The problem for Eve is, everyone, most notably CCP, wants to allow big epic battles, but instead of simply allowing those big battles, game mechanics force players into blobs because of the fact that blobs are the best way to win.
The mechanics need to encourage spreading out, not blobbing. Players/Fleets need reasons to spread out on multiple grids and across multiple systems.
The Real Space Initiative - V5 (Forum Link)
|
JabJabVVV
Reikoku
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:46:00 -
[17]
@ OP: I think you are right in one respect: CCP have done a very good job, it surprises me that the game is even remotely playable with 300+ people on the same grid. However this doesn't stop the situation being completely unacceptable; when you are selling massive scale real time e-combat then that is what people expect to be delivered NOT 30+ minute lag with occasional node crashes and de-syncs. The disparity between what is being marketed and encouraged within the game and what is being delivered is absolutely huge. The hardware and software do not even remotely support what the game mechanics encourage, that is my biggest issue. If they cannot fix the lag through upgrading the hardware then they should change the game mechanics so that game breaking situations do not arise... it's not rocket science.
The other issue I have with the lag is CCP's complete lack of communication on the matter, a few mutterings last year about a supercomputer and then silence ever since do not exactly inspire hope.
Basically CCP deserve a far bigger kicking than they are getting not less, they need to get their act together and find a way of fixing the issue, whether it be through hardware upgrades, software optimisation or completely re-writing the game mechanics so that the worst laggy situations do not arise. At the very least I think we deserve a comprehensive dev blog on the issue. I do not whine because I hate the game or CCP (I would have quit if that was the case) I complain because it depresses and frustrates me seeing this awesome game falling so far short of its potential and the apparent inaction on CCP's behalf.
-----------
When I was a n00b, I spake as a n00b, I understood as a n00b, I thought as a n00b: but when I became pr0, I put away n00bish things. |
Asestorian
Domination.
UnNatural Selection.
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 12:46:00 -
[18]
Also, people need to realise that CCP are already working on lag. Inifiband and all that. They also need to realise that CCP cannot fix lag instantly, and that they are not the first to whine about lag, and that their stupid, annoying little whine on the forums isn't going to suddenly make CCP take it any more seriously than they already are.
---
MOZO
|
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 13:26:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Asestorian
Also, people need to realise that CCP are already working on lag. Inifiband and all that.
I applaud CCP for the bigger better server, using technology in new ways, but there is a point of diminishing returns. We'll see how well server upgrades go, how much better the end user performance becomes. But they have the hardware now to have very smooth fleet battles, the problem now is the game mechanics, those same problems are going to exist on better hardware and middleware.
Fundemental game mechanics are the ultimate problem, not the hardware upon which they run.
The Real Space Initiative - V5 (Forum Link)
|
Sha4d13
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 13:37:00 -
[20]
Originally by: JabJabVVV
Edited by: JabJabVVV on 07/03/2008 13:01:56
@Agree with these two quotes: we need to start seeing penalties for blobbing (at the moment there are only benefits). Bump damage, sensor interference (ie the bigger the blob the greater the lock time), line of sight firing, wake (ie get to close to another ship and it's turbulence knocks you out of alignment), a small amount of damage stacking (explosions on a ship damage/deflect incoming fire perhaps?) and splash damage on some weapons (T2 ammo with splash damage anyone?) would seem to be some realistic and workable game mechanics to potentially discourage huge blobbing.
Jab- you serious? Can you imagine the huge amounts of additional processing power and information which would be needed to calculate line of sight, splash damage, bumping damage etc? Would equal nothing but more lag surely?
As for bump damage- unless we want to see hordes of goons with mwds ramming opposing fleets... not the greatest idea imo!
|
JabJabVVV
Reikoku
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 14:09:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Sha4d13
Jab- you serious? Can you imagine the huge amounts of additional processing power and information which would be needed to calculate line of sight, splash damage, bumping damage etc? Would equal nothing but more lag surely?
As for bump damage- unless we want to see hordes of goons with mwds ramming opposing fleets... not the greatest idea imo!
Absolutely serious. I realise that doing more requires greater processing power; that is why the effects would have to be non-trivial and is also why I made several suggestions BUT if implemented well they would lead to a dramatic drop in fleet size (essentially they would provide a real number optimum fleet size rather than the current situation of infinitely large optimum fleet size) then the extra processor power required would be more than offset by the smaller engagements. As for ramming being a valid tactic... why not? it's been used in real world navel combat, I see no reason why it shouldn't be so in Eve; sure it would require some tricky balancing and careful implementation (to avoid pile-ups outside Jita 4-4 for example) but that's not impossible.
Also to all you old hands: yes I realise that torp's used to do splash damage and bump damage used to be in the game but I think that it's now time that their re-introduction can at least be discussed (but with better implementation this time).
As another note: CCP's most recent anti blob weapons have both been splash/AOE weapons; namely bombs and titans. The titan is very effective anti blob weapon but too expensive and too powerful to be used as a general balancing tool and the bombs are ****e in huge battles due to the weakness of the stealth bomber and, ironically, lag. A BS with ranged weapons and limited splash damage would get round both these issues.
At the end of the day though my purpose wasn't to suggest how the game could be fixed per se, merely to show that there are more creative, more effective and more interesting solutions to lag than simply 'moar hamsters'
-----------
When I was a n00b, I spake as a n00b, I understood as a n00b, I thought as a n00b: but when I became pr0, I put away n00bish things. |
Brainless Bimbo
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 15:06:00 -
[22]
i wrote this on another thread and its how i look at lag
Originally by: Brainless Bimbo
Lol, All you do in eve is dependent on your onboard ship pooters, if you load enough crap in any program its going to lag, but it can be seen as part of the role play, more targets actually means that your ships battle computer stacks have to work harder tracking all the objects, as they are all running code written by the eve equilevent of MS its a given that they will fall over when overwhelemed by data that it can't process fast enough.
So Lag can be considered a game feature until our ships internal systems and subsystems are built to higher standards, stay out of the blob your ship systems was not made to handle it.
There lag explained by blaming the ship builders and their subsequent pilots not reading the manuals on the limits of the onboard computing capacity.
the OP is spot on, for the load the cluster is under its doing a good job tbth
... continued overleaf |
Matrixcvd
Rionnag Alba
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 15:18:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Brainless Bimbo
the OP is spot on, for the load the cluster is under its doing a good job tbth
brainless??? BimBo??? are you even playing this game. TQ is not holding up, not even close. You people are living in the twilight zone and have no clue cause you are just sitting and watchin your ship rotate in station. You clearly have a collective sense of dissulionment with actually flying internet spaceships and would rather bark nonsense from the CHEAP SEATS!
Well guess what folks, alot of us who are complaining about lag know the difference and can speak from experience on the fact that its getting worse, not better and will continue to get worse unless massive changes to game mechanics are in place. I don't speak for everyone that feels this way but i can take a consensus of the pulse and its plan simple
1. DEV'S NEED TO STOP WASTING TIME GENERATING USELESS CONTENT, EFFECTS, UBER GRAPHICS, AND BELLS AND WHISTLES THAT GET TURNED OFF ANYWAY
2. CHANGE MECHANICS TO PREVENT NODE DEATH
thats it, simple as that.
At this point, i prefer severe traffic advisories (probably not popular but ITS SIMPLE ALREADY HERE AND CAN BE IMPLIMENTED IMMEDIATELY). Flat out limit the number of people in system based on node stability. End of story. If pilots jump in, they either log out or die i dont frackin care anymore. You can't have a tactical plan with this server boinkin everyone, big gangs and small ones. There are no tactics left when you can barely activate your mods.
Most defensive strategies primarily involve causing massive lag to kill aggressors, i.e warping your alt to the gate and dumping 50-60 shuttles etc. Enough is Enough.
Either beef the servers up or limit the amount of traffic, pilots, and make people fight with what they have.
|
Zombie Network
GoonFleet
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 15:19:00 -
[24]
The lag is caused by CCP's servers because CCP's game mechanics require large groups of players to gang up to achieve anything worthwhile in PvP.
The cause and effect of LAG are both caused by CCP, and we should have every right to complain about both because they are the biggest frustrations and turn-offs this game has.
|
Tara Kobara
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 15:21:00 -
[25]
Originally by: OwlManAtt
Do you expect Microsoft Excel to crash when you fill in a thousand cells? No?
If the software allows you to do something, it will be done. If it cannot handle something despite allowing you to do it, the software is broken. If somebody wants to put an end to bad performance, then cap the number of pilots allowed in a system until InfiniBand is deployed.
Yeah and your allowed to drive around in your little car freely but just because you can doesnt mean your allowed to drive like a maniac, exceed the speed limit and get a few freinds together to drag race through the town center.
|
Dramund
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 15:24:00 -
[26]
Originally by: ceyriot
Thats just one system. What about 30,000 or more people playing at once?
Not that I'm disagreeing here, but that's actually the only important part - people in one system. If all 35,000 players had their own system, the server load would be equivalent to ~187 players in one system. Conversely, if you packed all 35,000 players into the same system, it would be equivalent to supporting 1.225 billion players if each had their own system. This is because players in the same system must constantly be communicating movement, coordinates, so forth to every other player in the system.
Just to clarify:
Say you have x people in system X, y people in system Y, z people in system Z. Here you are looking at, in "proper" notation of asymptotic growth, O(x^2 + y^2 + z^2). Pack those same people into the same system and you get O((x + y + z)^2).
Using some real numbers for a rough idea, assume 100 people in each system.
x=y=z=100
In different systems you have ~3000
Same system you have ~90,000; 30 times the load with the same number of players.
And that is why Jita sucks.
|
Matrixcvd
Rionnag Alba
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 15:33:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Dramund
Originally by: ceyriot
Thats just one system. What about 30,000 or more people playing at once?
Not that I'm disagreeing here, but that's actually the only important part - people in one system. If all 35,000 players had their own system, the server load would be equivalent to ~187 players in one system. Conversely, if you packed all 35,000 players into the same system, it would be equivalent to supporting 1.225 billion players if each had their own system. This is because players in the same system must constantly be communicating movement, coordinates, so forth to every other player in the system.
Just to clarify:
Say you have x people in system X, y people in system Y, z people in system Z. Here you are looking at, in "proper" notation of asymptotic growth, O(x^2 + y^2 + z^2). Pack those same people into the same system and you get O((x + y + z)^2).
Using some real numbers for a rough idea, assume 100 people in each system.
x=y=z=100
In different systems you have ~3000
Same system you have ~90,000; 30 times the load with the same number of players.
And that is why Jita sucks.
yeah math=traffic controls for laggy systems
|
Scott Ryder
Omen Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 16:51:00 -
[28]
Originally by: ceyriot
Edited by: ceyriot on 07/03/2008 00:19:58
I know theres a lot of hating going around on lag.
But have all of you actually thought what it would take to run 800 people from all over the world?
At once?
In one grid?
Shooting at each other?
Not to mention about 5000 miniature versions of them doing the same thing?
Thats just one system. What about 30,000 or more people playing at once?
Think about it. Then ask yourself why there isn't more lag.
(If you're going to say i haven't been affected by lag, I've lost a hulk, raven and a mackinaw to lag)
Oh my god! You lost 500 million?!
Come back when youve lost something like a deadspace fitted commandship, a officerfitted carrier or a officer fitted mothership.
|
Ghengis Tia
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 19:19:00 -
[29]
Realism and game-flow are ruined by lag. Period.
It occurs in heavily populated systems as well as systems with few players.
Its the biggest downside to a great game, and is a constant.
Its my $15 a month and I'll whine if I want to....
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |