| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Heptameron
Gallente
Octavian Vanguard
RAZOR Alliance
   |
Posted - 2008.07.21 11:46:00 -
[31]
Well unfortunately as human beings we seem to be a little flawed. We have this most annoying concept of quality of service and whining if said QoS is not as advertised and less than expected, especially if we throw our cash at it.
But to put the record straight the initial post was not a whine in any way shape or form, it was a statement of fact acknowleding that both sides are seriously affected by lag and in fact was more about the chest beating done by both sides about who won/lost etc when in fact neither sides skills ahve really been tested... just their patience.
@Kai - well i'm not here to debate my current employment so feel free to think whatever you so wish dude... But you have obviously never been in a customer service environment worth it's salt. I have worked for good and bad, the most successful one being that which had a customer service 2nd to none and LISTENED to those that paid for the service.
Have absolutely no doubt that every single 100k+ paying customer of Eve has the right to comment on the quality of service of a product they pay for particularly if that QoS is degraded to the point where it's unplayable.
*desperately trying not to smack.....* aaah dammit can't resist.. weiner in roaring fire? bit of overkill? just try a match dude would be done in one go and not risk singing your nuts
|
hired goon
Infinite Improbability Inc
Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 12:14:00 -
[32]
 Originally by: King Balthazar
Roaming gangs are fun but have you ever dreamed about a 150vs150 man fleet fight without lag???? Well I certainly have.
Well yeah, and I've also dreamed of games so realistic that the NPC's aren't voice acted, they actually speak to you. Maybe in a few years eh? But today that kind of thing doesn't exist, due to what we call 'technical limitations'. A bit like the limitation that prevents you from letting go of an apple and watching it drop up onto the ceiling instead of down onto the floor. The impossibility of having a lagless engagement with that many people swapping that much information through a single server is the limitation, and you have to understand that it's being worked on - not ignored!
I do understand you're only asking for a status update in laymans terms - to be honest I'd like the same. This does exist somewhere, I was reading it recently, something about this 'infiniband' that's being put in. I'm not sure exactly what it's all about (some pretty technical language used in that thread) but I'm pretty sure it won't 'cure' fleet lag the way many people are unfortunately expecting.
This is because I've seen promises of fleetlag-reducing upgrades for years now, and none have made a noticable difference.
Call me a cynic, but I don't expect fleet lag to ever realistically be eliminated with the numbers we bring - and neither should you. I put my faith in gameplay changes only.
-omg-
|
hired goon
Infinite Improbability Inc
Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 12:17:00 -
[33]
Besides 150 v 150 would still be boring even with no lag, I'm so sick of the whole 'get a tactical advantage for three hours' followed by 'primary target blah, secondary target blah' then 'warp out their/our titan is here'.
'use fleet fit or you won't be reimbursed'
'shoot who we say'
'log out now come back at 4am'
Sniff my balls, I'd rather be in a desperate small gang fight all stuck in a bubble with no chance of reinforcements!
-omg-
|
TroNaaR
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 12:24:00 -
[34]
No ones coming to save you....  
|
Tassi
Infinitus Odium
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 12:27:00 -
[35]
hired goon is the man tbfh.
You blob****ers made the bed you are sleeping in now, enjoy it or rather not 
stop napping the shit out of eve, might bring you fun 
|
rValdez5987
Amarr
Series of Tubes
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 12:39:00 -
[36]
Originally by: hired goon
Besides 150 v 150 would still be boring even with no lag, I'm so sick of the whole 'get a tactical advantage for three hours' followed by 'primary target blah, secondary target blah' then 'warp out their/our titan is here'.
'use fleet fit or you won't be reimbursed'
'shoot who we say'
'log out now come back at 4am'
Sniff my balls, I'd rather be in a desperate small gang fight all stuck in a bubble with no chance of reinforcements!
AMEN DUDE.
Those are the best fights. The ones that you cant really win, but you can still kill a whole assload of shit. To the point of which the other guys are like omfg dude we hold the field but they ****d us.
|
Merrick Tolkien
Shadow Company
Souls of Vengeance
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 13:20:00 -
[37]
Simply put, "its not like the old days" 
But heres hoping they add 5 new regions 500 new systems and some more stations and spread us all about a bit. Give us something more to fight over, a reason to send roaming scouting parties.
That, i hope, would bring 10-15 man roaming gangs back into play. In the mean time, EVE's too small and blob-online works.
Shadow Company
|
bloody johnroberts
Shiva
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 13:24:00 -
[38]
Great post we all know that lag is the enemy of every player of this game most or all exploit it in one way or another ie (release drones)or get your forces in before them or hot drop cap fleets into system remember the bookmarkers.
But all alliances still play with a 100 to 200 ship fleets and this wont change
i miss the small band of roaming ships although they do still exist they are few and far between or the nano kind.
ccp will never stop lag we in our hearts know this its a feature of the game now god help us when ambulation hits as we will have 150 alts running around the station for no reason other than creating lag
|
Tar om
Minmatar
Octavian Vanguard
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 13:41:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Tassi
hired goon is the man tbfh.
You blob****ers made the bed you are sleeping in now, enjoy it or rather not
stop napping the shit out of eve, might bring you fun
We didn't make the bed - CCP did. We're playing the endgame they created, its just that they never got as far as testing the endgame so we're having to put up with the consequences of some really bad design decisions. Yes, bad decisions - made by CCP. They've had 5 years to fix them, they've even looked into building a true supercomputer to fix it, but it has all gone quiet.
--
DEVS get multiple CPUs/Cores per system and all will be forgiven.
Parallel Python |
Deidranna
Minmatar
Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 13:49:00 -
[40]
the BLOB will always be the BLOB.
everyone will throw everything possible at any attacker or defender.
the days, people fought for fun are long gone in 0,0. :)
its all about the pwn and the killmail - with lots of expensive stuff lost so we can blame him for fail on coad - baby.
space is to valuable for having fun with it ... :)
and more space will only result in more space for some few selected powerhouses, the same we have today, they will have more pets ofc ...
--------------------------------------------------
GM Eldini > Hi, behaving are we?
GM Eldini > This chat is so intelligent it hurts..
*retirement in progress* paused*
|
Tearavygh Quillam
Caldari
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 13:50:00 -
[41]
What's the percentage of Eve players that "pay 100% of their subscription to fight in fleet battles"?
I don't think it's high enough so that we can expect a major change anytime soon.
|
Tar om
Minmatar
Octavian Vanguard
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 13:56:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Tearavygh Quillam
What's the percentage of Eve players that "pay 100% of their subscription to fight in fleet battles"?
I don't think it's high enough so that we can expect a major change anytime soon.
That's the sad truth. It also makes those shiny Eve trailers with big fleet battles a little bit of a lie....
--
DEVS get multiple CPUs/Cores per system and all will be forgiven.
Parallel Python |
Heptameron
Gallente
Octavian Vanguard
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 14:13:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Tar om
Originally by: Tearavygh Quillam
What's the percentage of Eve players that "pay 100% of their subscription to fight in fleet battles"?
I don't think it's high enough so that we can expect a major change anytime soon.
That's the sad truth. It also makes those shiny Eve trailers with big fleet battles a little bit of a lie....
Amen me old matey... As i said on TS last night i still remember the old JQA VV-VCR fleet fights, the first i think of the large scale ones (around 250-300) and they were virtually lag free for the most part. Yes the player base was less than half of what it is today but then that was pre 9467 patches, pre blade server installs, pre all the tweaking and tuning etc etc.
For those those advocates of only small scale combat, well what can i say 'cept yay you! Thats just quake in space. The game is designed to include large scale fleet fights which as i said in a previous post, are reduced to slugfests because of performance. True tactical skills would come into play and be better tested if it were semi lagless. Even moving around within 5k of your jump/warp in takes 5-10 minutes in a big fight these days.
|
Deva Blackfire
D00M.
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 14:20:00 -
[44]
Adapt or quit. I heard that phrase before and guess its spot on for this topic.
|
Princess Jodi
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 14:32:00 -
[45]
No matter the increase in power, us fleetmongers will always keep adding peeps until things lag. What is needed is NOT the ability to handle 250 vs 250 fights, its something for the 250 peeps to do other than try to engage another 250 peeps.
CCP, give us other objectives and Soverignty mechanics so that we have multiple points of battle in multiple systems. Stop forcing everything through bottlenecks like gates. Create multiple small-scale objectives that actually mean something.
|
King Balthazar
Federation of Freedom Fighters
Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 14:35:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Deva Blackfire
Adapt or quit. I heard that phrase before and guess its spot on for this topic.
God caod full of idiots today, for once there is an objective thread... i mean have you seen any goonies on this OP? no, that means its serious.
this is not about adapting, we just thinking and wishing eve could be a better game all around...
|
Deva Blackfire
D00M.
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 14:52:00 -
[47]
Originally by: King Balthazar
Originally by: Deva Blackfire
Adapt or quit. I heard that phrase before and guess its spot on for this topic.
God caod full of idiots today, for once there is an objective thread... i mean have you seen any goonies on this OP? no, that means its serious.
this is not about adapting, we just thinking and wishing eve could be a better game all around...
So keep dreaming on idiot. I for other hand prefer to play with stuff i already have.
|
Malcanis
We are Legend
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 14:55:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Tar om
Originally by: Tassi
hired goon is the man tbfh.
You blob****ers made the bed you are sleeping in now, enjoy it or rather not
stop napping the shit out of eve, might bring you fun
We didn't make the bed - CCP did. We're playing the endgame they created, its just that they never got as far as testing the endgame so we're having to put up with the consequences of some really bad design decisions. Yes, bad decisions - made by CCP. They've had 5 years to fix them, they've even looked into building a true supercomputer to fix it, but it has all gone quiet.
Hmmm alliance fleetfights are "the endgame"? My feeling is that there's a whole phase of the game that comes after you feel the need to fleet up with a huge multi-alliance fleet. The value of player skill, experience and fitting reduces with the size of the fleet. More experienced high-SP players who want to fly nice ships with shiney modules may avoid fleet fights for just this reason: 5 max-skilled players in T2-fit fleet BS = 7 noobs who can barely undock theirs.
CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that. |
Kai Jyokoroi
The Collective
Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 15:08:00 -
[49]
Edited by: Kai Jyokoroi on 21/07/2008 15:09:26
Originally by: King Balthazar
Regarding the IT geek above who is defending ccp, you might be an IT expert but you also an idiot who needs to learn a bit more learn English.
OK, normally picking on someone's spelling or grammar is the lowest form of wit. But that, there, is just delicious.
|
Kai Jyokoroi
The Collective
Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 15:13:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Heptameron
@Kai - well i'm not here to debate my current employment so feel free to think whatever you so wish dude... But you have obviously never been in a customer service environment worth it's salt.
On the contrary. I work for a market-leading digital agency as an technical manager. I am on the phone to our clients all day as their primary contact. I work in the design and implementation of extremely complex e-commerce websites up to and including distributed large scale databases. Admittedly, that's not game design, but it's of a similar scale sometimes.
My clients know that fixing complex things takes time and resource. As an 'IT Director', so should you.
|
Straight Chillen
Gallente
Solar Wind
Ministry Of Amarrian Secret Service
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 15:53:00 -
[51]
The lag problem will never go away, think about it like this. People are just going to keep pushing the limits of how many people they can stuff into a system. Example, a few years ago the biggest fights were about 80-100 on a side, and they were laggy back then. Now we get 200-400 people and its laggy. So once the next technology upgrade comes, people are just gonna slam 600+ in the system and ***** about how laggy it is. Its a never ending vicious cycle.
The only remedy will have to be gameplay changes that discourge blobing. An interesting idea a friend of mine came up with, is to basically make it so that way in order to have a cyno jammer online, u need a special pos mod in every adjacent system, and these systems cannot be cyno jammed, due to some sort of fictional interferance between the mods. Drop those mods, and the cyno jammer offlines.
That would break up the current alamo style of gameplay that we see, where an attacking force has no other option but to try to zerg a cyno jammed system. Now the attackers have multipule angles of assault, and the defenders can't just sit around with their thumbs up their ass camping the shit outta the cyno jammer.
and yes i know that the F&I forums is that way 
|
Pesadel0
Minmatar
Black Nova Corp
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 16:10:00 -
[52]
Lag wont ever go away, because we all blob,and it is a exponential problem.I still remember when 50VS50 was lagy ,when 100vs100 was lag,when 150vs150(nowadays).
So yes they are trying to fix the stuff ,i imagine it must be an herculean task because when they get the 200VS200 to work ,then we will climb a notch and go 300vs300 and the whine about lag rewinds and makes a full circle again.
If anything they have to find some kind of solutions to the way 0.0 warfare works,that aint easy neither ,so i guess we are trapped in this gigantic world that sometimes works and sometimes doesn¦t.Adapt or quit.
To people saying that there will be games that will let you play agains 100VS100 without lag ,sorry that is bullshit and you know it,hell even AOC that is instanced has alot of problems dealing with 50vs50 and it is a recent game,wow craps itself with 100 people on the same location...
------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Lowa
Gallente
North Star Networks
Black Hand.
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 16:43:00 -
[53]
One note on "it will never go away we'll just bring more people"; How many more can we actually get?
The biggest fight ever to take place in EVE has involved about 2000 people.
About 1000 of the in the same system (Molles 2nd titan scrambled?) and the rest stuck on the way.
Now...that was prime time, mega-nap-train collitions and alliances, north, south, east, west,
problably some people Devhaxed in from Jove space (and their mothers) and then some!
Even if the growth of EVE it self is high (Not sure where we are atm) the number of people in 0.0
alliance warfare is not growing very much hence ~2000 people is about as big as it gets right now.
And it also require these mega-alliances to be created and hopefully that wont happen again for awhile.
I think what I'm saying here is, what is a reasonable number to aim for?
Trying to solve the many many 100-200 people fights or the very rare 2000?
Hmm..I think I forgot my finishing touch but wtf, I'm going fishing instead.
Cheers,
Lowa
|
Jallem Sims
Minmatar
Quantum Warriors
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 16:48:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Straight Chillen
The lag problem will never go away, think about it like this. People are just going to keep pushing the limits of how many people they can stuff into a system. Example, a few years ago the biggest fights were about 80-100 on a side, and they were laggy back then. Now we get 200-400 people and its laggy. So once the next technology upgrade comes, people are just gonna slam 600+ in the system and ***** about how laggy it is. Its a never ending vicious cycle.
The only remedy will have to be gameplay changes that discourge blobing. An interesting idea a friend of mine came up with, is to basically make it so that way in order to have a cyno jammer online, u need a special pos mod in every adjacent system, and these systems cannot be cyno jammed, due to some sort of fictional interferance between the mods. Drop those mods, and the cyno jammer offlines.
That would break up the current alamo style of gameplay that we see, where an attacking force has no other option but to try to zerg a cyno jammed system. Now the attackers have multipule angles of assault, and the defenders can't just sit around with their thumbs up their ass camping the shit outta the cyno jammer.
and yes i know that the F&I forums is that way
personally, i think this has legs.... having a system web around the system you want cyno jammed.
the web been fully functional when all mods are active, and starts to break down the more mods offline. This allowing fluctuations of the cyno jammer, at times when caps can jump in and when they can't. (thus also stopping caps jumping out aswell while cyno jammer is operational, making it a risk to jump in without the web fully down)
or the more networked mods downed the less ehp the cyno jammer has. Could be that a cyno jammer takes up so much cpu that you can't fit so many defence mods on. Thus, the more moons in none cyno jammed systems with the networked cyno web mods inplace has to be removed before making an atempt on the actual cyno jammer itself.
this could spread people out, trying to take the cyno offline and trying to keep the network cyno web up and running in multiple systems.
well... got carried away, but i like this thought... i wonder if its possible tbh.
(this is the opinion of myself and not represents my corp or affiliated alliance in anyway) <-- see what i did there :P |
Dalifron
E.S.M.C.
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 16:55:00 -
[55]
Originally by: King Balthazar
If you see my post all I am asking is ôwhatÆs the planö
From what I can gather, CCP wants to attack it from two angles. The first is from a gameplay point of view, encouraging large engagements to be broken up into multiple smaller engagements. The second is from the back-end processing point of view, using the Infiniband technology that is discussed in the thread pointed out to you in your Open Letter.
The current state of both of these initiatives is unknown. CCP has asked for proposals to go through the CSM to address the gameplay aspect, and there is little indication on how advanced the Infiniband project is. I think it can safely be assumed that the current status quo will be in place for the next year, however. |
th1rdeye
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 17:52:00 -
[56]
Edited by: th1rdeye on 21/07/2008 17:52:12
Originally by: Dalifron
The second is from the back-end processing point of view, using the Infiniband technology...
I understand CCP is working on the bandwidth issue, and you can't expect a quick-fix overnight. What leaves me dissatisfied is their constant spouting of "largest single server online game" and the technical miracles needed to make it work, while at the same time trying to jam ever more people in it.
Flashy commercials on Sci-Fi, the "buddy" program, free trials for deactivated accounts, etc. If you can't get lag cured to a playable level in fleet battles, Jita, and Lvl 4 mission systems, why invite more people in?
If you went to a restaurant where the service was interminably slow, you would be disappointed but you might wait. Now what if the same restaurant kept filing ever more feet through the door while you were waiting?
|
Commander Solo
Digital Fury Corporation
Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 18:13:00 -
[57]
Edited by: Commander Solo on 21/07/2008 18:14:33
1) Change the territorial mechanics to consist of simultaneous objectives, distributed over an area of space.
2) All main power bloc's reset standings and agree not to reform nap trains, coalitions and communities. (Guilty as charged)
3) Stop asking for upgrades that are not financially viable.
4) Cure world hunger
5) Profit
|
Dalifron
E.S.M.C.
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 18:18:00 -
[58]
Originally by: th1rdeye
Flashy commercials on Sci-Fi, the "buddy" program, free trials for deactivated accounts, etc. If you can't get lag cured to a playable level in fleet battles, Jita, and Lvl 4 mission systems, why invite more people in?
I won't attempt to guess the reasons behind CCPs marketing and growth strategies, beyond assuming that they wish to make sure that there are sufficient new players (and returning older players) to at least cover the natural customer churn all MMOs exhibit, so they can continue generating the revenue to cover the costs of developing both EVE and the World of Darkness game.
|
Bartholomeus Crane
Gallente
The Crane Family
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 19:08:00 -
[59]
OK, here's the lag problem as I see it.
Suppose you have two players on a grid fighting each other. Each player is represented by ten variables. Speed, direction, resists, what-have-you, each variable represented by a byte of information (just assuming).
For the fight, each player needs to be aware of the other players variables, so it needs to have access the 20 variables. It needs that access every, say, millisecond or so. so that's 10 bytes per millisecond for each player, or 10 kilobytes per second. In total 2*10=20 Kb/s per player. As network loads go, that's doable, for a 1-on-1.
With more players these (ficticious) numbers are multiplied. So from the player's perspective, on a 20-on-20 fight that means 40*10 = 400 kb/s of network bandwidth. See, it's getting worse. Larger numbers of players means more bandwidth needed.
But that's only considering the client view, for the server needs to push out a lot more data, because it needs to push that out for every player involved, so that's 20*20*10 kb/s, and that's exponential with the number of players!
But that's only considering bandwidth as the bottleneck, consider the server's calculations as well, as each of those variables can be affected by each of the other variables, so for every variable, it has to check all other variables and see if they affect it. Not an easy task!
Now, I pulled those numbers out of my rear-end, as we all know full well that there are many more variables in EVE to consider in a fight, but all are not as relevant. And luckily we also know that an update every millisecond for each of those variables is not needed. Also, since EVE works with a distributed system, a lot of those calculations can be done in parallel using the RAMSAN for fast access to those variables. So, that's a mixed bag (which makes it more difficult to calculate).
I do hope, however, that this (simplistic) example shows that lag, as such, can never be solved completely, however much we like it to be. There will always be a number of players, or a number of variables that will outstrip the bandwidth available. For a similar more classic example of such a closed system, check out the pages on the n-body problem
What is possible is to reduce the factors. That means lesser players on the grid (which we don't want) or less relevant variables. CCP has be trying to do the latter, for example with the new gang system. In some instances it has failed, for example by making it less profitable to have a blob and therefore reduce the number of players on the grid (the small gang objective anyone?).
I think CCP is aware of this problem and is working on it. One idea I like is to make repping (shield/armour/hull) dependent on number of players in gang or on grid. That means introducing a law of diminished return on bringing more players to a fight. I fully admit to have no clue on how this should work, but maybe it can work.
DISCLAIMER: I probably made a mistake calculating this, but you'll get the picture.
--
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? |
Straight Chillen
Gallente
Solar Wind
Ministry Of Amarrian Secret Service
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 20:54:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Hesh Ballantine Not two little rag tag bands of 10 or 15 guys having a slap fight and then leaving with their e-honor intact.[/quote
i dont think anyone wants to cut down the numbers to something that small, but i think a few 75-100vs75-100 battles spread across a few systems would be a lot less laggy and much more fun then trying to cram 600+ people into a system till the node pops, Or were u not there for the delve campaign?
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |