EVE Search - Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 .. 14 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 3 post(s)
Belmarduk Amarr de Prieure Four Elements	Posted - 2008.07.17 15:30:00 - [301] I am looking forward to ambulation and am also hoping that "sometime in the future"(TM) one will be able to land on planets and build houses perhaps. Adding "Walking on Stations" is another addon into a allready great game. I`m not thrilled with everything ccp does but with most of it. You should look at other games that have been running 5+ years - I would say Eve is doing VERY well in Comparisson... If you dont want to walk on Stations then dont get out of your ship - Simple fix The majority wants walking on Stations! But I you are right in one thing - lag must be fixed. Greetings Belmarduk CCP Please give us casual players a Skill-Queue !
Guillight BLue Gallente Secret Society	Posted - 2008.07.17 15:36:00 - [302] Originally by: Lord Zoran i still can't see the need for ambulation nor any benefits I will get, ignoring everyone else as I only care for myself! Fixed it for you! As I'm getting absolutely sick and tired for the saddest people on earth deciding what everyone else should and would like! Cheers
Beltantis Torrence	Posted - 2008.07.17 15:50:00 - [303] Originally by: Malcanis Edited by: Malcanis on 17/07/2008 14:08:52 Originally by: Beltantis Torrence Originally by: Malcanis In short: wanting something won't make it happen. It's not a question of financial or programming resources, it's a question of technological limitations. The computing power required for large battles goes up roughly proportional to X! (that's factorial of X; X! = 1 x 2 x 3 x 4 ... x X). The only people claim its technically impossible to have large fleet battles without unstoppable server-side lag are people who aren't technical. Its not technically impossible at all. There are systems that exist which handle a lot more load then that - they just handle it in a smarter way. This boils down to a cost and priority issue, not a technical limitation. If CCP was willing to spend the money on programmers/architects and made it a high priority this would get done. EDT: OK that wasn't helpful. I think we can infer that the solution to lag is neither easy nor cheap. Since CCP have every reason to fix it - not least because they themselves play the game - and no other reason not to, we can reasonably infer that a "complete" fix to lag (lets say 1000 v 1000 = reasonably playable, screens load before jump cloak is dropped, module lag less than 1 second) is either technologically impossible, financially impractical, or would simply require a complete re-write of the codebase (or any combination of the 3). You tell me that it is technologically possible. Very well, then the limiting factors are either money (moar RAM moar CPU!) or coding resources. Coding seems most likely, and of course that complete re-write requires money as well - and lots of it. And lots and lots of time too... It seems reasonable to be that CCP actually have a pretty good idea of what would have to be done to "fix" lag, and have come to the conclusion that the costs outweigh the benefits in terms of $/player satisfaction, and therefore they will better serve the game by applying resources elsewhere. Since we don't have access to the data as they do, we're hardly in a position to second-guess them. If you really are good at programming, and you disagree, then by all means make your development proposal. If you actually do have a practical, affordable proposal to put forward to fix lag, I'm sure they'd be overjoyed to hear your ideas. They're going about it but in a different way. The new MMO they're making is underpinned by C/C++ code and the resources they're hiring in Atlanta are oriented around those skills. I assume rather than fixing Eve they're just going to build an engine and port Eve into that engine at some point. You're right in that they certainly know what has to be done. Its not some insurmountable task or anything. I'm not claiming to be the best software architect on the planet but saying things like "Its technically impossible" is just outright wrong. Why people keep repeating it when they don't know what they're talking about is beyond me. It boils down to a bad design decision that is costly to fix and rather than having that development effort be an expense to the Eve project, its an investment in the company.
Irina Delorean Caldari TURBINIUM	Posted - 2008.07.17 15:50:00 - [304] Originally by: Guillight BLue Edited by: Guillight BLue on 17/07/2008 15:36:41 Originally by: Lord Zoran i still can't see the need for ambulation nor any benefits I will get, ignoring everyone else as I only care for myself! Fixed it for you! As I'm getting absolutely sick and tired from sad people like you deciding what everyone else should and would like! Cheers You are SO rigth. The game its gonna expand the gameplay experience, but some people are like "OMG, we dont like new things, i want to play the same game since 2003"
Bleeshtar	Posted - 2008.07.17 15:56:00 - [305] Originally by: Alpha Prime Edited by: Alpha Prime on 13/07/2008 13:11:04 Ever since we've heard & seen this, i have spoken to alot of players concerning this waste of manhours gone into this huge waste of effort. Strangely enough ever since I started playing (at launch) there was an outcry by a large portion of the player base... "Let us get out of our ships!" Way I see it CCP is trying to cater to that large portion. Carry on.
Lazuran Gallente Time And ISK Sink Corporation	Posted - 2008.07.17 16:01:00 - [306] Originally by: Guillight BLue Anyone that comes forward with THE solution TODAY to make 500 versus 500 battles possible WITHOUT lagging the average PC at home, with EVE's current graphical quality? Wins the lotery, can cash millions of dollars in the game industry and relax on a tropical island the rest of his life. Some lag is OK (1-2 seconds), but people not seeing anything for 10+ minutes while others on the same grid are fighting is BROKEN and defending it is STUPID, kk?
Lazuran Gallente Time And ISK Sink Corporation	Posted - 2008.07.17 16:02:00 - [307] Originally by: Bleeshtar Originally by: Alpha Prime Edited by: Alpha Prime on 13/07/2008 13:11:04 Ever since we've heard & seen this, i have spoken to alot of players concerning this waste of manhours gone into this huge waste of effort. Strangely enough ever since I started playing (at launch) there was an outcry by a large portion of the player base... "Let us get out of our ships!" Way I see it CCP is trying to cater to that large portion. Carry on. Next thing those people will ask is to get out of their clothes and do naughty things to each other, I tell you ...
Jim McGregor	Posted - 2008.07.17 16:04:00 - [308] Originally by: Lazuran Next thing those people will ask is to get out of their clothes and do naughty things to each other, I tell you ... What, you guys dont do that already? --- Originally by: Roguehalo Can you nano Titans?
Beltantis Torrence	Posted - 2008.07.17 16:05:00 - [309] Originally by: Guillight BLue Edited by: Guillight BLue on 17/07/2008 14:31:42 Originally by: Malcanis EDT: OK that wasn't helpful. I think we can infer that the solution to lag is neither easy nor cheap. Since CCP have every reason to fix it - not least because they themselves play the game - and no other reason not to, we can reasonably infer that a "complete" fix to lag (lets say 1000 v 1000 = reasonably playable, screens load before jump cloak is dropped, module lag less than 1 second) is either technologically impossible, financially impractical, or would simply require a complete re-write of the codebase (or any combination of the 3). You tell me that it is technologically possible. Very well, then the limiting factors are either money (moar RAM moar CPU!) or coding resources. Coding seems most likely, and of course that complete re-write requires money as well - and lots of it. And lots and lots of time too... It seems reasonable to be that CCP actually have a pretty good idea of what would have to be done to "fix" lag, and have come to the conclusion that the costs outweigh the benefits in terms of $/player satisfaction, and therefore they will better serve the game by applying resources elsewhere. Since we don't have access to the data as they do, we're hardly in a position to second-guess them. If you really are good at programming, and you disagree, then by all means make your development proposal. If you actually do have a practical, affordable proposal to put forward to fix lag, I'm sure they'd be overjoyed to hear your ideas. Well said. People posting all kinds of accusations towards CCP, but have no knowledge nor clue whatsoever to backup their accusations nor carrying a solution forward themselves. Anyone that comes forward with THE solution TODAY to make 500 versus 500 battles possible WITHOUT lagging the average PC at home, with EVE's current graphical quality? Wins the lotery, can cash millions of dollars in the game industry and relax on a tropical island the rest of his life. Enough said. Uh, if you read the boards people have posted lots of solutions. From using lookup tables instead of computing to elastic computing to better caching policies to multithreading, etc. At the very least everyone agrees having the server code written in Python is not ever going to perform well in a real time system where there's state management. What's the point of suggesting beyond that when CCP hasn't even given up on Python yet for their server side processing? They're looking for a quick and dirty and there just isn't one. But if you're going to say "its not possible" then you should be aware that what you're saying is just bullshit. There are lots of systems that are able to process staggering amounts of data (credit card systems, passive biometric systems, x-ray/bomb scanners, geological survey systems, b2c and b2b commerce systems, banking/trading platforms, etc) real time. If you're not a programmer then at least use some common sense.
Surreptitious Isk Sink Inc.	Posted - 2008.07.17 16:08:00 - [310] Originally by: Malcanis Edited by: Malcanis on 17/07/2008 13:24:02 Originally by: Aaron i havent read all of the posts in the topic so im just gonna throw this in there, Pity or you'd see that your post was neither original nor correct. In short: wanting something won't make it happen. It's not a question of financial or programming resources, it's a question of technological limitations. The computing power required for large battles goes up roughly proportional to X! (that's factorial of X; X! = 1 x 2 x 3 x 4 ... x X). CCP have improved a lot the number of ships which can participate in fleet actions, but as soon they increase the capability to n ships, players will bring n+m ships (m being enough to make everything grind to a blackscreen-infested slideshow). Until n ~ total number of players in the game, lag will be at least a potential problem. In other words, there will always be lag. Since lag is as much a social problem as a technological one, one way to mitigate it is to give players lots of other things to do than attend huge fleet battles.... Saying its technologically impossible is just ignorant. Yes, you heard it here. It is literally impossible to get 100 objects on a screen interacting with 100 other objects on the screen. Drink more of the CCP cool-aid you lame-o fanboy. Syrup
Lazuran Gallente Time And ISK Sink Corporation	Posted - 2008.07.17 16:24:00 - [311] Originally by: Surreptitious Originally by: Malcanis Edited by: Malcanis on 17/07/2008 13:24:02 Originally by: Aaron i havent read all of the posts in the topic so im just gonna throw this in there, Pity or you'd see that your post was neither original nor correct. In short: wanting something won't make it happen. It's not a question of financial or programming resources, it's a question of technological limitations. The computing power required for large battles goes up roughly proportional to X! (that's factorial of X; X! = 1 x 2 x 3 x 4 ... x X). CCP have improved a lot the number of ships which can participate in fleet actions, but as soon they increase the capability to n ships, players will bring n+m ships (m being enough to make everything grind to a blackscreen-infested slideshow). Until n ~ total number of players in the game, lag will be at least a potential problem. In other words, there will always be lag. Since lag is as much a social problem as a technological one, one way to mitigate it is to give players lots of other things to do than attend huge fleet battles.... Saying its technologically impossible is just ignorant. Yes, you heard it here. It is literally impossible to get 100 objects on a screen interacting with 100 other objects on the screen. Drink more of the CCP cool-aid you lame-o fanboy. Syrup Hehe ... some objects interacting with each other ... in your browser (try key 5 and then the left mouse button for a bit).
Guillight BLue Gallente Secret Society	Posted - 2008.07.17 16:26:00 - [312] Edited by: Guillight BLue on 17/07/2008 16:30:26 Originally by: Surreptitious Originally by: Malcanis Edited by: Malcanis on 17/07/2008 13:24:02 Originally by: Aaron i havent read all of the posts in the topic so im just gonna throw this in there, Pity or you'd see that your post was neither original nor correct. In short: wanting something won't make it happen. It's not a question of financial or programming resources, it's a question of technological limitations. The computing power required for large battles goes up roughly proportional to X! (that's factorial of X; X! = 1 x 2 x 3 x 4 ... x X). CCP have improved a lot the number of ships which can participate in fleet actions, but as soon they increase the capability to n ships, players will bring n+m ships (m being enough to make everything grind to a blackscreen-infested slideshow). Until n ~ total number of players in the game, lag will be at least a potential problem. In other words, there will always be lag. Since lag is as much a social problem as a technological one, one way to mitigate it is to give players lots of other things to do than attend huge fleet battles.... Saying its technologically impossible is just ignorant. Yes, you heard it here. It is literally impossible to get 100 objects on a screen interacting with 100 other objects on the screen. Drink more of the CCP cool-aid you lame-o fanboy. Syrup Then do it yourself and come up with a REAL solution and more important PROOF that it's possible! Just like the poster before you, so I dont have to quote twice. Ofcourse there is server hardware today to build a supercomputer to can process a battle of 500 versus 500 people. Really no problem! But what YOU ALL PEOPLE fail misserably at and DO NOT realise is that there isn't any PC yet you can install at home that can draw a 1000 ships, with all its Trinity glory, lightning effects and particle effects WITHOUT lagging the hell out of your computer! As you can bet that even with a QuadCore CPU, 8GB of system RAM, 2x GeForce 9800GTX 1GB in SLI and a couple SATA2 harddrives in RAID stripping mode won't be able to draw all that on your precious PC screen at home! Even if CCP dumbed their graphics back into World of Warcraft cartoon quality! So what good does an EXTREMELY expensive Server Supercomputer setup do, if the average PC at home today still can't even cut it! The Unreal Engine has always been and still is praised for the BEST engine out there with one of the best netcoding out there! Yet EPIC is still stuck at drawing a max of 128 people on the map, without making a game build on that engine completely unplayable! Or are we already forgotten Unreal Tournament 2003 and 2004? So cut CCP some slack will ya!
Lazuran Gallente Time And ISK Sink Corporation	Posted - 2008.07.17 16:28:00 - [313] Originally by: Guillight BLue But what YOU ALL PEOPLE fail misserably at and DO NOT realise is that there isn't any PC yet you can install at home that can draw a 1000 ships, with all its Trinity glory, lightning effects and particle effects WITHOUT lagging the hell out of your computer! Noone is asking for EVE to do that. All current 3D games use simplified models for objects that are further away and in fleet battles in EVE all you will usually see is tiny dots with icons on top. Really, the client-side graphics aren't the problem and if you had any kind of serious IT education, you wouldn't write something clueless like you just did.
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2008.07.17 16:30:00 - [314] Edited by: Crumplecorn on 17/07/2008 16:31:39 Originally by: Surreptitious Saying its technologically impossible is just ignorant. Originally by: Beltantis Torrence Its not technically impossible at all. I find it amusing that these are both responses to a post which did not even contain the word 'impossible' (or a synonym thereof) and which was referring to the general problem of load increasing exponentially in n anyway, not the potential computing power of a modern server relative to the current size of the playerbase. Originally by: Guillight BLue But what YOU ALL PEOPLE fail misserably at and DO NOT realise is that there isn't any PC yet you can install at home that can draw a 1000 ships, with all its Trinity glory, lightning effects and particle effects WITHOUT lagging the hell out of your computer! This amuses me more though, despite being obvioustroll. - DesuSigs
Bleeshtar	Posted - 2008.07.17 16:31:00 - [315] Originally by: Lazuran Originally by: Bleeshtar Originally by: Alpha Prime Edited by: Alpha Prime on 13/07/2008 13:11:04 Ever since we've heard & seen this, i have spoken to alot of players concerning this waste of manhours gone into this huge waste of effort. Strangely enough ever since I started playing (at launch) there was an outcry by a large portion of the player base... "Let us get out of our ships!" Way I see it CCP is trying to cater to that large portion. Carry on. Next thing those people will ask is to get out of their clothes and do naughty things to each other, I tell you ... Flirt up your pod!
Jim McGregor	Posted - 2008.07.17 16:35:00 - [316] Edited by: Jim McGregor on 17/07/2008 16:35:14 Originally by: Bleeshtar Flirt up your pod! I love it how everybody looks like a photo model but is single... The screenshot section is like Big Brother Cartoon style. --- Originally by: Roguehalo Can you nano Titans?
Guillight BLue Gallente Secret Society	Posted - 2008.07.17 16:35:00 - [317] Edited by: Guillight BLue on 17/07/2008 16:43:15 Edited by: Guillight BLue on 17/07/2008 16:37:42 Originally by: Lazuran Originally by: Guillight BLue But what YOU ALL PEOPLE fail misserably at and DO NOT realise is that there isn't any PC yet you can install at home that can draw a 1000 ships, with all its Trinity glory, lightning effects and particle effects WITHOUT lagging the hell out of your computer! Noone is asking for EVE to do that. All current 3D games use simplified models for objects that are further away and in fleet battles in EVE all you will usually see is tiny dots with icons on top. Really, the client-side graphics aren't the problem and if you had any kind of serious IT education, you wouldn't write something clueless like you just did. Haha, well you clearly haven't! That's for sure. Dream on. In EVE we are talking about 500 versus 500 ships in close up battle, with all the particals and effects spraying around! That's not something you can dumb down to little dots on your screen! These 500 versus 500 still need to be processed. Or do you like being hit and blown up by invisible targets all the time, because of your oh so great IT education experience CCP won't need to show all 1000 ships on the screen nor update all of them in your overview?? And distance blurring and LOD scaling isn't gonna help in that! And btw. Ships are being scaled over distance in EVE Online already so you know. Happy dreaming in your IT LaLaLa land. Cheers
Tarminic 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2008.07.17 16:49:00 - [318] Much computing ignorance in this thread. To summarize: -There is no civilian server that can handle the massive battles in EVE without significant amounts of lag -Combat cannot be significantly optimized to reduce its complexity without fundamentally altering game mechanics -CCP is rewriting their server architecture to allow handling of combat to be split across nodes, which it cannot currently do Any questions? ---------------- Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.83 (Updated 7/3)
Nitemare111 Dark Horse Regiment Inc.	Posted - 2008.07.17 17:05:00 - [319] Ambulation = Interesting, especially if we can get our characters drunk in the bar and go flying with random "drunk" effects. Lag = Not CCP's fault. Fix for lag = Easy. Put a maximum cap of 100 ships per Alliance per fleet per system. Period. No more. Got 300 ships ready to go? 3 fleets. 3 systems. Tough shit. ------ "When in doubt, aim for the crotch." "There's no problem that the application of suitable firepower cannot fix." Originally by: A Belief Nothing is yours until it's ISK in your wallet. So it goes.
Lazuran Gallente Time And ISK Sink Corporation	Posted - 2008.07.17 17:19:00 - [320] Originally by: Guillight BLue In EVE we are talking about 500 versus 500 ships in close up battle, with all the particals and effects spraying around! I don't know what you are talking about, but RIGHT NOW in EVE you will not see 500 v 500 ships close up with "all the particals" (LOL). And there's no demand to do this and this isn't what causes the server lag currently. Quote: And distance blurring and various graphic scaling isn't gonna help in that as its already being done in EVE Online. So you fail on that too! Make up your mind, either you need to see them with full details or you don't. Fact is, you don't and what the servers need to process has nothing to do with graphics. All the effects are client-side "particals". Quote: EDIT: And no I am not trolling, as I ACTUALLY DO work in the IT as Systems Engineer and ACTUALLY have a clue what todays AVAILABLE server technology is capable of and more important, what our PC clients at home CAN and CANNOT handle. Well you are ACTUALLY clueless and clients are not the issue.
Lazuran Gallente Time And ISK Sink Corporation	Posted - 2008.07.17 17:22:00 - [321] Originally by: Tarminic Much computing ignorance in this thread. To summarize: -There is no civilian server that can handle the massive battles in EVE without significant amounts of lag Where do you "summarize" this nonsense from? CCP's server code is just clunky old single-threaded Python code, that's the whole problem at hand. Nowdays you can get "civilian" servers with 16 cores everywhere and CCP's crummy code can't benefit from it. Don't make stupid broad statements like "there is no ..." when in fact the problem is "CCP's code is currently not able to ...".
Tarminic 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2008.07.17 17:29:00 - [322] Originally by: Lazuran Originally by: Tarminic Much computing ignorance in this thread. To summarize: -There is no civilian server that can handle the massive battles in EVE without significant amounts of lag Where do you "summarize" this nonsense from? CCP's server code is just clunky old single-threaded Python code, that's the whole problem at hand. Nowdays you can get "civilian" servers with 16 cores everywhere and CCP's crummy code can't benefit from it. Don't make stupid broad statements like "there is no ..." when in fact the problem is "CCP's code is currently not able to ...". Did you notice anywhere in that summary that I said that it's not possible? I said, specifically, "There is no civilian server that can handle the massive battles in EVE without significant amounts of lag." I never said why that's the case, because it was a summary. Yes, most of the reason is because CCP can't multithread their server code, and won't be able to for some time (according to one of the devs). I wasn't defending CCP or making excuses for them. My statement still stands. Take EVE's software architecture and put it on any civilian server in the world and it won't fare any better. ---------------- Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.83 (Updated 7/3)
Guillight BLue Gallente Secret Society	Posted - 2008.07.17 17:37:00 - [323] Edited by: Guillight BLue on 17/07/2008 17:39:50 Originally by: Tarminic Originally by: Lazuran Originally by: Tarminic Much computing ignorance in this thread. To summarize: -There is no civilian server that can handle the massive battles in EVE without significant amounts of lag Where do you "summarize" this nonsense from? CCP's server code is just clunky old single-threaded Python code, that's the whole problem at hand. Nowdays you can get "civilian" servers with 16 cores everywhere and CCP's crummy code can't benefit from it. Don't make stupid broad statements like "there is no ..." when in fact the problem is "CCP's code is currently not able to ...". Did you notice anywhere in that summary that I said that it's not possible? I said, specifically, "There is no civilian server that can handle the massive battles in EVE without significant amounts of lag." I never said why that's the case, because it was a summary. Yes, most of the reason is because CCP can't multithread their server code, and won't be able to for some time (according to one of the devs). I wasn't defending CCP or making excuses for them. My statement still stands. Take EVE's software architecture and put it on any civilian server in the world and it won't fare any better. Just leave it Tarminic. Lazuran is just a silly little troll only reading one line of your and my posts, missinterpret them and then answers with bull, because he has no clue whatsoever what he's talking about. One last statement towards Lazuran, as Im done with him: Even if CCP rewrites to code (wich they are doing to my knowledge) so they can fully utilize multicore CPU's, it will still NOT be the solution to make it possible on the client side! And I did NOT come up with the 500 versus 500 battles, but the OP did and many other ignorant people in this topic, demanding it from CCP, while having no clue that with todays technology (Again from both Server side AS client side!!) it's just NOT possible without LAG! It's NOT only about graphics, it's all the complex processing that takes place in such battles and your client that constantly needs to be updated with just TOO much data! Not to mention all the info in your UI overview! Cheers
Lazuran Gallente Time And ISK Sink Corporation	Posted - 2008.07.17 18:29:00 - [324] Originally by: Tarminic Did you notice anywhere in that summary that I said that it's not possible? I said, specifically, "There is no civilian server that can handle the massive battles in EVE without significant amounts of lag." I never said why that's the case, because it was a summary. Yes, most of the reason is because CCP can't multithread their server code, and won't be able to for some time (according to one of the devs). I wasn't defending CCP or making excuses for them. My statement still stands. Take EVE's software architecture and put it on any civilian server in the world and it won't fare any better. But the point is precisely that it's not the availability of "civilian servers" that causes these problems, but the badly written server-side code. You tried deliberately to make it sound like we're out of luck because you can't get servers that would make EVE work well. But you can get them easily if CCP invests enough effort into fixing the code. Noone is asking specifically for better hardware, but for a focused effort to fix the lag problems and that means mainly to fix the software.
Lazuran Gallente Time And ISK Sink Corporation	Posted - 2008.07.17 18:33:00 - [325] Originally by: Guillight BLue And I did NOT come up with the 500 versus 500 battles, but the OP did and many other ignorant people in this topic, demanding it from CCP, while having no clue that with todays technology (Again from both Server side AS client side!!) it's just NOT possible without LAG! It's NOT only about graphics, it's all the complex processing that takes place in such battles and your client that constantly needs to be updated with just TOO much data! Not to mention all the info in your UI overview! Cheers This clueless nonsense is easily contradicted by simply observing current fleet battles where 20% of the people can fight and the rest see nothing, without those 20% having a better PC or connection than the others. It's a server-side problem, all clueless comments about the PC not being able to handle data yada yada can be ignored/ridiculed.
Aero Zolic DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.07.17 19:01:00 - [326] I'm also thinking that we don't need more eye-candy and new content and all that. We need a stable server to play the game. I understand that all the high-sec mission running carebears go crazy for new content and stuff cause they don't have a clue what's going on during fleet fights with 200-400+ people in local and capitals and all. It's totally unplayable. You often don't die there because you failed doing something or you lack skill - you get killed because of the huge lag. I agree that it's cool and all but stable and lower-lag server >>>> walking in stations and all that. \|\| Gigabyte GA-P35C-DS3R \| Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 @ 3.2GHz \| 4x1GB A-Data EXTREME DDR2 800+ \| BFG GeForce 8800GTS 512MB \| WDC 500GB SATA-II \| Windows Vista Business x64 SP1 \| FSP BlueStorm II 500W \|\|
Tarminic 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2008.07.17 19:08:00 - [327] Originally by: Lazuran But the point is precisely that it's not the availability of "civilian servers" that causes these problems, but the badly written server-side code. I wouldn't call it badly written. It's single threaded, yes, which is one of the primary factors limiting its scalability at the moment. However, when it was written servers with multiple processors weren't common and single-core processors were improving in accordance with Moore's law. CCP lost by gambling on single-core systems, but they didn't have much reason to believe differently at the time. Quote: You tried deliberately to make it sound like we're out of luck because you can't get servers that would make EVE work well. But you can get them easily if CCP invests enough effort into fixing the code. Noone is asking specifically for better hardware, but for a focused effort to fix the lag problems and that means mainly to fix the software. Which they are doing. Except that takes time, effort, and money. There is no "quick fix" which people like you seem to suggest that CCP is intentionally ignoring. ---------------- Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.83 (Updated 7/3)
Xaen Caldari Caritas.	Posted - 2008.07.17 19:17:00 - [328] Originally by: Nitemare111 Lag = Not CCP's fault. Only imbeciles ever say this. If they designed a single shard system that was incapable of handling the numbers of players that can easily be found wanting to congregate, then it's their exclusively their failing. Similarly brain dead arguments are trotted out whenever lag in jita is brought up. It's CCP that failed to provide a centralized market that could handle the volumes of players that would predictably and inevitably congregate in a single place to do business. It's predictable, documented, human behavior that they failed to account for. Lag from too many people is the same damn thing. It's not the players' fault for wanting what they were promised. A single shard sandbox with Massive battles. I've never been in a big battle that was exciting beyond not knowing that my ship is already dead and I don't know it yet due to lag. It is a Massively Multiplayer Online Rolplaying Game isn't it? Well it is, if you throw out the massive part outside of Jita. Specific systems are on their own nodes beefy nodes, but if you're trying to have a massive fleet battle in a different system, you're SOL. The hardware isn't there, and the software is incapable of moving the battle to nodes that can handle the sudden huge load while the system is live. Such systems do exist, even outside the military. But Tranquility isn't on one of them. - Support fixing the UI\|Suggest Jita fixes\|Compact logs
masumi vega Die Trying Souls of Vengeance	Posted - 2008.07.17 19:27:00 - [329] I wont be using the station content and i think it will make for a much more boring game. People will not undock since they will have other things to do. Less ships in space means less pew pew. So i am not a big fan.
Malcanis We are Legend	Posted - 2008.07.17 19:32:00 - [330] Originally by: Surreptitious Originally by: Malcanis Edited by: Malcanis on 17/07/2008 13:24:02 Originally by: Aaron i havent read all of the posts in the topic so im just gonna throw this in there, Pity or you'd see that your post was neither original nor correct. In short: wanting something won't make it happen. It's not a question of financial or programming resources, it's a question of technological limitations. The computing power required for large battles goes up roughly proportional to X! (that's factorial of X; X! = 1 x 2 x 3 x 4 ... x X). CCP have improved a lot the number of ships which can participate in fleet actions, but as soon they increase the capability to n ships, players will bring n+m ships (m being enough to make everything grind to a blackscreen-infested slideshow). Until n ~ total number of players in the game, lag will be at least a potential problem. In other words, there will always be lag. Since lag is as much a social problem as a technological one, one way to mitigate it is to give players lots of other things to do than attend huge fleet battles.... Saying its technologically impossible is just ignorant. Yes, you heard it here. It is literally impossible to get 100 objects on a screen interacting with 100 other objects on the screen. Drink more of the CCP cool-aid you lame-o fanboy. Syrup Flaming people for something they did not actually say makes one look smart. You look like a genius right now. CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 .. 14 :: 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.