| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
General Windypops
Skullduggery Inc
   |
Posted - 2008.08.06 22:43:00 -
[331]
 Originally by: Mia Archer
simple WHINING loud enough works :P
Great. Thanks for taking the time to explain that to us.
|
Mia Archer
Amarr
Insidious Existence
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 22:45:00 -
[332]
NP I realize the average CAOD poster is incapable of the level of thinking required to understand the concept.
____________________________________________
|
Moonlight Express
Amarr
Moonlight Express Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 22:47:00 -
[333]
Originally by: General Windypops
Originally by: Mia Archer
simple WHINING loud enough works :P
Great. Thanks for taking the time to explain that to us.
But he's right. Please whine little more about lag and maybe they'll fix that too.
|
Le Skunk
Low Sec Liberators
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 22:52:00 -
[334]
HAI GHAIS!
I WAS AT THE FIGHT AND I LAGGED IT TOOK ME 15 MINS TO ACTIVATE A MODULE.
THE FUNNY THING WAS EXACTLY THE SAME THING HAPPEND AT THE LAST 10 FLEET FIGHTS
I SHOT AT WHAT MY FC TOLD ME TO SHOOT AT - I AM REALLY SKILLFULL
IM A THICK AS PIG SHIT 0.0 PILOT AND I LOVE IT
SKUNK
|
General Windypops
Skullduggery Inc
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 22:55:00 -
[335]
Originally by: Le Skunk
HAI GHAIS!
I WAS AT THE FIGHT AND I LAGGED IT TOOK ME 15 MINS TO ACTIVATE A MODULE.
THE FUNNY THING WAS EXACTLY THE SAME THING HAPPEND AT THE LAST 10 FLEET FIGHTS
I SHOT AT WHAT MY FC TOLD ME TO SHOOT AT - I AM REALLY SKILLFULL
IM A THICK AS PIG SHIT 0.0 PILOT AND I LOVE IT
SKUNK
That's nice, dear. And did you play with any of the other little boys?
|
Ghaelsto Kakram
Mindgamers
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 23:05:00 -
[336]
Originally by: General Windypops
Originally by: Ghaelsto Kakram
So why did Bob try and ridicule ACSN fighter tactics way back?
Now you say it actually works showing ACSN was right all along?
Just one more case of contradicting yourself on COAD.
So how does your own foot taste like?
I think his foot is too busy repeatedly kicking NC's arse for him to take the time to nibble at it. All the same, NC are doing just GREAT - so keep up the good work.
So you're saying max is all about fighting NC?
Does this mean Bob is rotating goals here?
Besides mr WarBottom didn't respond to this very urgent issue about his foot in his mouth. Or does he have a nice ad hominem reply prepared?
|
General Windypops
Skullduggery Inc
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 23:12:00 -
[337]
Originally by: Ghaelsto Kakram
Originally by: General Windypops
Originally by: Ghaelsto Kakram
So why did Bob try and ridicule ACSN fighter tactics way back?
Now you say it actually works showing ACSN was right all along?
Just one more case of contradicting yourself on COAD.
So how does your own foot taste like?
I think his foot is too busy repeatedly kicking NC's arse for him to take the time to nibble at it. All the same, NC are doing just GREAT - so keep up the good work.
So you're saying max is all about fighting NC?
Does this mean Bob is rotating goals here?
Besides mr WarBottom didn't respond to this very urgent issue about his foot in his mouth. Or does he have a nice ad hominem reply prepared?
I think he's probably busy, since we're already dismantling another (presumably unimportant) system.
And yes - you are ABSOLUTELY right!!!!! I'm saying that because for the last few days we've been fighting the NC that's all we'll do ever. You, Mr Kakram, are a tactical genius.
I can't understand why you haven't been promoted.
|
General Windypops
Skullduggery Inc
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 23:15:00 -
[338]
Actually, screw it, you're not just a genuis - you're a LEGEND. Pls some NC corp - pick this guy up - he's got something you want. (No, sorry, it's not a ceasefire).
|
Ghaelsto Kakram
Mindgamers
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 23:27:00 -
[339]
Do you always get like this when its time to change your nappy?
Makes you wonder why Bob is bothering to get these NC moons when those PL moons are closer.
Max is a nice veiled attempt of getting into the moon hugging game which Eve is atm.
|
General Windypops
Skullduggery Inc
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 23:34:00 -
[340]
Originally by: Ghaelsto Kakram
Do you always get like this when its time to change your nappy?
Makes you wonder why Bob is bothering to get these NC moons when those PL moons are closer.
Max is a nice veiled attempt of getting into the moon hugging game which Eve is atm.
Maybe it's because NC alts like you keep up the antagonism? And because more distant targets are harder, therefore more fun.
|
Draygo Korvan
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 23:38:00 -
[341]
Originally by: Waagaa Ktlehr
6-8 weapons giving feedback on ammo use, hit quality and so forth to one/two clients vs fighters that give no feedback at all to the host.
The bottleneck in node stability is not CPU power, it's network bandwidth. Fighters cause way less messages than battleship guns do, hence less network strain.
How to figure it out?
We did an experiment in QY6, we had 100 carriers launch fighters and put them on the station - the system was fine with 1-2 sec module lag.
We asked 100 BS to shoot the station: the system grinded to a halt and module lag was up by 30sec-1 minute.
Cool, can you by chance have 100 carriers run smartbombs while guarding dreads etc to simulate carrier anti-fighter defenses of fleet fights? I actually think that would cause much more server load and network load than bs shooting a tower. Also I think you are right about the network layer being the probable problem, and it certainly agrees with my experimentation.
--
|
HostageTaker
Black Nova Corp
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 23:48:00 -
[342]
>>> EvE-Online Wallpapers <<< |
Ghaelsto Kakram
Mindgamers
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 23:56:00 -
[343]
Edited by: Ghaelsto Kakram on 06/08/2008 23:57:38
Originally by: General Windypops
Maybe it's because NC alts like you keep up the antagonism?
Swing and miss.
Originally by: General Windypops
And because more distant targets are harder, therefore more fun.
Pos shooting in undefended systems, putting up your own and not bothering to take them down when you leave doesn't sound like fun to me. Or is that the reason you brought those pets? Have them do the mind numbing work of putting up Pos?
|
Avon
Caldari
Black Nova Corp
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 00:34:00 -
[344]
Bring back Chika Qre - he was funny.
Eve-Online: The Text Adventure |
Haradgrim
Tyrell Corp
INTERDICTION
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 01:23:00 -
[345]
Originally by: HostageTaker
--
Originally by: CCP Oveur
...every forum whine feels like a baby pony is getting killed
|
SK Rooster
No Trademark
Obsidian Empire
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 01:24:00 -
[346]
Originally by: Princess Jodi
I lived and got on 4 Dread killmails - what would I be complaining about?
*locks and fires 1 volley at 4 dreads*
*cynos out and leaves friends to die*
*brags on CAOD*
|
Hexman
Black Plague.
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 01:36:00 -
[347]
Originally by: Butter Dog
Edited by: Butter Dog on 06/08/2008 15:52:51
Originally by: Hexman
Originally by: Princess Jodi
*Snip* *reasonable stuff*
-PJ
Yeah it was something similar for me too. We were part of the so-called reinforcements coming from VFK. It took me 2 hrs to jump in and load grid *in a pod*.
Seriously, if CCP markets these so-called "epic fleet fights" as one of EVE's selling points, they absolutely need to start fixing this absurd lag (<400 people in local, ffs) before going on to worthless crap like ambulation and FW.
Every time a member of the NC cries about lag (you know, the people who brought an 800 man blob against a single alliance), I chuckle and touch myself in naughty places.
Keep it up. I am
Oh can it, you idiot. I'm not complaining that we lost a fight due to lag - Hell I'm not saying we lost BECAUSE of lag. We lost, for whatever reason. We might have won just as well, but the lag problem is still very real. The lag IS there, and it affects everyone - although for some individuals it can be manageable at times and it seems to be very random. MY whine is because I wasted 2 hrs trying to "play" this game and couldn't because of lag.
Dumbass...
|
Hexman
Black Plague.
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 01:41:00 -
[348]
Originally by: Waagaa Ktlehr
6-8 weapons giving feedback on ammo use, hit quality and so forth to one/two clients vs fighters that give no feedback at all to the host.
The bottleneck in node stability is not CPU power, it's network bandwidth. Fighters cause way less messages than battleship guns do, hence less network strain.
How to figure it out?
We did an experiment in QY6, we had 100 carriers launch fighters and put them on the station - the system was fine with 1-2 sec module lag.
We asked 100 BS to shoot the station: the system grinded to a halt and module lag was up by 30sec-1 minute.
My guess is that the bottleneck is access to the database... but you know, they're using MS SQL which isn't a bad DBMS. But it's hardly designed for something like this, imo. But I'll shut up now or we'll get from "OMG HAXXOR" trolling to "OMG MS HATERZ" trolling... :p
|
Homo Erectus
Evolution
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 01:52:00 -
[349]
Originally by: Le Skunk
HAI GHAIS!
I WAS AT THE FIGHT AND I LAGGED IT TOOK ME 15 MINS TO ACTIVATE A MODULE.
THE FUNNY THING WAS EXACTLY THE SAME THING HAPPEND AT THE LAST 10 FLEET FIGHTS
I SHOT AT WHAT MY FC TOLD ME TO SHOOT AT - I AM REALLY SKILLFULL
IM A THICK AS PIG SHIT 0.0 PILOT AND I LOVE IT
SKUNK
caps lock is cruise control for cool :|
|
Levitikon
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 02:30:00 -
[350]
Originally by: Lord WarATron
Edited by: Lord WarATron on 06/08/2008 21:47:18
Originally by: NAT Mav
Interesting conclusions there Waagaa.
In my experience, I've been in many battleship fleets where we can be happily shooting a POS with zero module delay, and as soon as a single capital warps on grid, it goes to hell. You say it isn't a CPU issue, but rather a network bandwidth bottleneck. What are you basing this on? Does each node have its own dedicated internet connection? If not, a bandwidth issue should affect every node using that connection. As I understand it, CCP has just a few primary connections coming into the datacenter, meaning that any time a large fight takes place, a large percentage of the cluster should slow to a crawl as well.
Another thing supporting this theory is the whole "reinforced node" idea of assigning 1 system to 1 CPU. If the issue were bandwidth, reallocating CPU resources would make no difference in clearing a network bottleneck. Similarly, if battleship guns are the issue, there's no damage calculations or messages taking place when they are so lagged out they can't lock anything! If guns firing is really the issue, the problem should be self-repairing: as the system lags, less people can fire, reducing the lag!
I think it's great that you took the time to attempt to test this out, but the logic behind your conclusions is flawed. The only way to know for sure, or at least to pinpoint the exact issue, is for CCP to really look hard at it. Either they haven't done that, or they can't fix it. Either way, it isn't showing signs of getting better.
There can be many issues since nobody here, despite what people think, are in the CCP server room. Practical reality shows Battleships runs slower than carriers, from which educated guesses can be formed. Is the lag client side? Server side? Crappy UI related?
Even today, I haven't a clue why with 600 people on grid, the server needs to let my client know each person has a sensor booster running, who activated a invul field on their drake, who is running a armour rep and a record of each individual shot from each of a BS 8 turret's. Is this contributing to lag? Who knows, but practice shows it does.
I think the real question is when CCP will implement a solution to reducing fleet lag, rather than anything else. Sadly, I do not know if they have even left the brainstoming stage yet, so such a solution, whatever it may be, could be years away.
Welll, your client needs all that information to accurately present battlefield to you. If server won't tell your client that this silly figate buzzing around you just activated sensor booster, then your client will think you managed to warp out and are stting happily at the POS sipping coke, while in server reality that sensor booster gave figate pilot 0.1 sec edge it needed to scramble you before you warped out, and then you know - you're dead and mildly irritated about desyncs and sloppy CCP's programmers. Algorithms that would be able to determine what information is of no consequence to player, with near 100% accuracy would be more complicated than battle code themselves, so duh.
Anyway, that's not where the lag is. The real one happens when CPU load runs through 100% and timecontinuity goes to hell. Some commands get lost, some delayed way beyond their original scope, as a result some simply gets executed wrong, adding to the mess.
If it only about staticdelay, we could add a nice background effect and call it Epic Battle Bullet(Laser) Time mode. and people would probably loved that, too.
Solutions include creating multicore stackless python and simply throwing more CPUs at thte problem (right now CCP is restricted to using single core/cpu/server per node), moving to professional HPC solution and pooling several physical servers into one, virtual server that stackless nodes run on or rewriting entire server code to cope with extremely high loads.
|
Gjs312
coracao ardente
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 02:38:00 -
[351]
Originally by: Waagaa Ktlehr
6-8 weapons giving feedback on ammo use, hit quality and so forth to one/two clients vs fighters that give no feedback at all to the host.
The bottleneck in node stability is not CPU power, it's network bandwidth. Fighters cause way less messages than battleship guns do, hence less network strain.
How to figure it out?
We did an experiment in QY6, we had 100 carriers launch fighters and put them on the station - the system was fine with 1-2 sec module lag.
We asked 100 BS to shoot the station: the system grinded to a halt and module lag was up by 30sec-1 minute.
Not trying to troll, but I'm not certain this makes sense. True that fighters dont cause any network traffic for the controller, but they do cause traffic for the ship that they are attacking, which would not be reflected if you were shooting at a station as opposed to an actual player.
It's cool that you did that experiment, but the part you seem to have forgotten is that its entirely possible 100 carriers shooting at a station would not cause lag while 100 carriers shooting at a player would cause lag. On top of that fighters add traffic in the form of keeping track of the actual position of the fighters in space on the network end, even if they are not displayed on the bracket.
I mean, I don't really have a side picked in this fight or really care that much either way, but I think "carriers cause less lag then dreads" is a pretty bold statement.
|
Zeoliter
Reikoku
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 04:17:00 -
[352]
Network Bandwidth Bottleneck Test:
Turn on a few torrent downloads. Login to Eve. Watch yourself e-warp after jumping through a gate from an empty system into an empty system. Happens to me almost every time.
|
Pan Crastus
Anti-Metagaming League
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 06:13:00 -
[353]
Originally by: Waagaa Ktlehr
6-8 weapons giving feedback on ammo use, hit quality and so forth to one/two clients vs fighters that give no feedback at all to the host.
The bottleneck in node stability is not CPU power, it's network bandwidth. Fighters cause way less messages than battleship guns do, hence less network strain.
How to figure it out?
We did an experiment in QY6, we had 100 carriers launch fighters and put them on the station - the system was fine with 1-2 sec module lag.
We asked 100 BS to shoot the station: the system grinded to a halt and module lag was up by 30sec-1 minute.
How many of those BS used missiles / were Ravens?
I suspect that missiles cause a huge amount of lag compared to turrets/drones etc. because all clients on the same grid need frequently updated positions for all missiles on the grid (same as with drones, just more objects to track).
Of course there's some prediction used by the clients (leads to the odd missiles effects all of us have seen, like missiles hitting empty space when the target has warped or missiles seemingly hitting you/someone else while not in range etc.), but the fact that updated positions have to be sent over the net all the time for each missile follows from the missiles obviously chasing moving targets on our screens and e.g. that old video where a small ship (crow?) has 100s of citadel torps chasing it at a POS.
How to PVP: 1. buy ISK with GTCs, 2. fit cloak, learn aggro mechanics, 3. buy second account for metagaming
|
Donna Maria
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 06:18:00 -
[354]
Mmm.. The Station in 2-K has a WaffleHouse. WaffleS!
Im the girl momma warned you about..
|
Butter Dog
The Littlest Hobos
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 07:17:00 -
[355]
Originally by: Ghaelsto Kakram
Pos shooting in undefended systems, putting up your own and not bothering to take them down when you leave doesn't sound like fun to me. Or is that the reason you brought those pets? Have them do the mind numbing work of putting up Pos?
You're absolutely right. Its been nothing but a POS grind and there have been NO fleet fights or supercap kills. None whatsoever.
In other words: You really need to stop posting. Forever.
----------
|
Red Moon
Destructive Influence
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 07:28:00 -
[356]
Found some great music for the next rotation dance nc will be doing tonight
Rotational Music
I think is also goes great with some of the poster in here tbh
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Don Z0LA
Caldari
TunDraGon
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 07:39:00 -
[357]
Originally by: Butter Dog
Originally by: Ghaelsto Kakram
Pos shooting in undefended systems, putting up your own and not bothering to take them down when you leave doesn't sound like fun to me. Or is that the reason you brought those pets? Have them do the mind numbing work of putting up Pos?
You're absolutely right. Its been nothing but a POS grind and there have been NO fleet fights or supercap kills. None whatsoever.
In other words: You really need to stop posting. Forever.
hey your face looks familiar. arent you the guy who "will never give up, will fight till last ship, never gonna leave north space, your alliance will crush nc, etc"?
i think you are :D seems your salty tears are revenged by bob, your gloating about them raping nc is a bit sad when you failed to do anything of things you said you will. and i think bob would be happier if you would not do forum propaganda for them.
in the other words : You should have not ever start posting. ever. :D
on the topic, grats bob to be first to kill 4 ms in one engagement.
|
Kaleeb
UK1 Zero
G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 07:55:00 -
[358]
Originally by: Mia Archer
Honestly no one won because both sides were cheated out of what should have been an awesomely epic fight by horrible server mechanics on CCPs part, and to point out I have never once said a single thing about nerfing nanos. Nanos are perfectly fine the way they are if anything CCP needs to nerf the shit out of capital blobbing because the damn server hardware cant support it for shit. CCP has done nothing but promote bigger and bigger blobs while actualy reducing the ability of the server to handle them. Having been in the cap fight for bobs shipyard and in a large number of the fights in delve i can honestly say i have NEVER lagged this bad. 400 ppl in local for lag this bad is a plain and simply horrible.
CCP has been dragging its ass for months with it's "need for speed initiative" which has done nothing but actualy slow everything down from the looks of it, Traffic control is extremely more frequent than 6 months ago, desyncs happen more and more often for reasons that shouldnt even cause desyncs, ive seen an entire system of 30 ppl in local desync because a single carrier jumped in.
This has absolutly nothing to do with bob vs NC or who is better than who it has everything to do with CCP's inability to support a system of warfare that they have driven into being through their own actions. Then acting as if they are not responsible for the results. The truly epic fights that eve has the potential for and that we pay to be able to participate in simply ARE not possible we are paying for a shoddy product and ccp doesnt care. The simple fact that there are almost no updates on the status of the server improvements aside from random undetalied posts ever 3 months proves it.
If CCP fixed the lag so that both sides could bring 150-200 people each then alliances would bring 300 each and we would still have lag. Imo the best way to fix the problem is look at limiting fleet size some how, then if you have 300 mates who want a fight you will need to spread the forces out and go hit a different objective rather than blobbing into 1 system and crashing the node.
|
Tearavygh Quillam
Caldari
COLSUP
Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 08:25:00 -
[359]
Originally by: Kaleeb
If CCP fixed the lag so that both sides could bring 150-200 people each then alliances would bring 300 each and we would still have lag. Imo the best way to fix the problem is look at limiting fleet size some how, then if you have 300 mates who want a fight you will need to spread the forces out and go hit a different objective rather than blobbing into 1 system and crashing the node.
I'm not so sure about that.
Less lag would make battles more fluid. Targets will fall quicker and so less stress on the server to sustain a pile of ships that didn't load associated to a pile of angry players that randomly click buttons which aggravates even more the state of the server. The lag will be self contained.
And then, how many players could you physically assemble? I personally have heard of some battles were people crammed 1000, 900, 800 into a system (I've even participated in a few). How many times? Not many times.
The most common battles are 150 vs 150 and rarely escalate over 250 vs 250.
It would be "OK" from CCP to state that they can reasonably (30s to load, 10s module activation lag) and periodically handle battles of 150 vs 150 and that they can't guarantee anything beyond that. But, sometimes, the game can't even handle 75 vs 75.
Now, nobody is expecting a total and sudden cure, but after several years, sadly any real progress has been made into knowing the causes of lag and then proposing solutions.
|
Butter Dog
The Littlest Hobos
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 09:10:00 -
[360]
Originally by: Don Z0LA
Originally by: Butter Dog
Originally by: Ghaelsto Kakram
Pos shooting in undefended systems, putting up your own and not bothering to take them down when you leave doesn't sound like fun to me. Or is that the reason you brought those pets? Have them do the mind numbing work of putting up Pos?
You're absolutely right. Its been nothing but a POS grind and there have been NO fleet fights or supercap kills. None whatsoever.
In other words: You really need to stop posting. Forever.
hey your face looks familiar. arent you the guy who "will never give up, will fight till last ship, never gonna leave north space, your alliance will crush nc, etc"?
i think you are :D seems your salty tears are revenged by bob, your gloating about them raping nc is a bit sad when you failed to do anything of things you said you will. and i think bob would be happier if you would not do forum propaganda for them.
in the other words : You should have not ever start posting. ever. :D
on the topic, grats bob to be first to kill 4 ms in one engagement.
Well lets see, INSRG alone inflicted more damage against the NC during their uberblob campaign against us than BoB have inclicted against them so far, in a similar timescale. I think the final tally was something like 180bn ISK of damage over 4 weeks or so agaisnt them.
Of course, ultimately we failed where BoB succeeded - they have greater numbers and resources and I wish them well.
What have YOU achieved against the NC precisely?
----------
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |