open All Channels
seplocked Test Server Feedback
blankseplocked Mass-Testing 2.0 - Feedback thread!
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 23 ... : last (27)

Author Topic

Ariel Nova
Posted - 2010.09.09 22:42:00 - [541]
 

Sept. 9 2010 @ 20:00

Vista Premium 32Bit
Intel Core2 Quad Q6600 (2.4GHZ)
Nvidia GeForce GTS 250
3.25GB Ram

Audio ON
Brackets ON
FPS AVG 14
module desync mostly. At the very end I was unable to do anything.
Unfamiliar with TQ fleet battles, so I can not compare them.
My first server test, was a little confusing at first. People don't know how to listen to devs and not shoot each other. Other than that it was fun and I hope it helped. I will participate in future tests.

Terino
Lone Star Academy
Lone Star Partners
Posted - 2010.09.09 22:43:00 - [542]
 

Machine Info


* Which test you were in: September 9 @ 20:00 eve

* OS version windows 7 pro

* CPU Intel Q6700 quad core

* GPU 250GTS 1GB

* RAM 8GB Ram


User Experience


* Did you have Audio enabled? yes evevoice and alerts only

* Did you have brackets turned on? no

* Average FPS during the test(s) 13FPS peak at 60FPS lows of 0.5FPS

* Did you notice any desyncs during the test? loss of module control, stuttering sound on occasion.

* On a scale of 1-10, how would you compare FPS and performance between this test and TQ? 1

* Describe your experience, make comments, suggestions, etc.

This was my 3rd test and this test makes me want to quit the game and go play space invaders it would be more responsive! Modules slow or non responsive, the only good thing was the number of attendees this time giving better results.

Had errors with voice software log attached below.

Logserver files uploaded to eve-files http://eve-files.com/dl/229252

Terino.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
Vivox log :-
06-19-10 06:57:10.223 2884 Error VivoxClient::LoginContext::OnWebClientLogoutCompleted m_webClient->EndLogout() failed - this=0x79d3900,e=couldn't connect to server

C:\src\buildtools\branches\voon\tmpqpjfgv\src\vivox.system\httpconnection.cpp(452) : VivoxSystem::HttpConnectionImpl::DownloadDataInternal - error 10007

marcelito
Posted - 2010.09.09 22:49:00 - [543]
 

Machine Info


* Which test you were in: September 9 @ 20.00

* OS version : XP 32 bits

* CPU : Intel Core i7 920

* GPU : ATI HD 4850

* RAM : 4GB


User Experience


* Did you have Audio enabled?
Yes, and fleet voice channel too.

* Did you have brackets turned on?
Yes, only showing non fleeted ships.

* Average FPS during the test(s):
No idea but seemed kinda playable, I'd say 5 to 30ish.

* Did you notice any desyncs during the test?
No.

* On a scale of 1-10, how would you compare FPS and performance between this test and TQ? (1=way worse, 5=same, 10=OMG this is awesome) :
5, both massive jump and fleet fight is awful and unplayable.

* Describe your experience, make comments, suggestions, etc.
- Jump tests:
Jump lag was awful, 5 minutes to jump from system to another with or without the spam.

- Combat tests:
Module lag was horrible: manual cycling wasn't very helpful either.
Guns were stuck with charges but appeared empty. Unable to fire and unable to change ammo, even docked. Unable to unfit the guns.

Raw Matters
Minmatar
Posted - 2010.09.09 22:53:00 - [544]
 

Machine Info

Which test you were in: 10. Sep. 2010
OS version: Windows 7 Prof (German)
CPU: AMD Phenon 9850 Quad-Core @2.5 Ghz
GPU: NVidia 9800GTX
RAM: 4GB

User Experience
Did you have Audio enabled? Yes
Did you have brackets turned on? Yes
Average FPS during the test(s): Jump test: 8-15 FPS, Fight test: 0 FPS
Did you notice any desyncs during the test? During fight test events were delayed by up to 10 minutes
On a scale of 1-10, how would you compare FPS and performance between this test and TQ? 4

Personal experience
During the jump test it was a little laggy but beside the fact that I appeared 1.000.000 km away from the gate everything was fine.
During the fight test the game was no longer playable in the default view (medium zoom, all ships on the list). Any action was delayed by minutes, including server side actions like Drone deployment. This persisted in all views (system map, options menu). Once I switched the view tab to one that displayed nothing but the Stargates/Stations, the FPS jumped back at 60, the response time returned back to normal values. Switching back to the ship view caused the FPS and responsiveness to immediately drop again. The CPU usage during that time was 1 full core only.

The lag I experienced was obviously related to the overview updates, as the FPS were not limited by the hardware, but by the client itself. I am surprised that the draw cycle of the client waits on a full update from the network, as this is a known bottleneck in all FPS games. A better approach here would most likely be to keep the client doing it's drawing cycles and use the state as it is currently known. This would of course cause desyncs (lag-jumps) but the player is at least able to use his client. I had similar experiences during all parts of eve (e.g. selling in Jita) as the client with all actions always waits for a confirmation from the server.

As it is obviously necessary to have the server to confirm all client actions, in most cases the client can "assume" that the action was correct, and if not roll it back later on the client. E.g. if you move a large stack of items to another, accessible container, the client can safely assume that the server will allow this action and immediately display the content in the other container. This would give the players a much more responsive game experience and enhance the gameplay (imo) by a lot more than any other fancy interface increase could ever do.

However the test was very entertaining after all. :D

Camios
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2010.09.09 22:56:00 - [545]
 

Which test you were in: 9 sep
OS version: Vista
CPU: core2 duo E8400
GPU: Ati 4850
RAM: 4GB


# Did you have Audio enabled? YES

# Did you have brackets turned on? NO, PLAYING IN F10MAP

# Average FPS during the test(s) WHO CARES? GOOD ENOUGH

# Did you notice any desyncs during the test? NO

# On a scale of 1-10, how would you compare FPS and performance between this test and TQ? (1=way worse, 5=same, 10=OMG this is awesome) 5, LATELY i HAVE NOT BEEN IN A tq FIGHT.

# Describe your experience, make comments, suggestions, etc.

ABOUT MODULE CYCLING

During the fight, module activation happened with 5s delay even on bad lag conditions.
What I mean: I pressed F1-F7 and after 5s the launcher activated and launched its first missile.

Gun cycling after the first firing was problematic. A launcher with a 10s rate of fire needed 50s or more to fire another salvo. Manual cycling and automatic cycling didn't differ significatively in the little time I had been in the test (the whole last fight).

You know that this will invalidate all the game design related calculations like "how much time do I need to kill that POS?".
Actually it's either like the DPS of all ships is reduced to 20% or less, or the shield and cap recharge rate are increased to 500% and EHP are increased to 500% or more.
So, actually balance is screwed (obvious but I wanted to say this).

Lorth Kelser
Posted - 2010.09.09 22:56:00 - [546]
 

Machine Info



•Which test you were in: Sep 9th

•OS version Windows7 64bit


•CPU Dual Core Opteron 185 2.61Ghz

•GPU Nvidia 8800GT


•RAM 4GB



User Experience



•Did you have Audio enabled? Yes


•Did you have brackets turned on? No


•Average FPS during the test(s) 7.5


•Did you notice any desyncs during the test? Modules where not in sync sometimes very bad other not so much during fight 1 and 2 alot of module lag and out of sync modules test 3 seemed better once eveyone was loaded on the grid


•On a scale of 1-10, how would you compare FPS and performance between this test and TQ? 5

•Describe your experience, make comments, suggestions, etc Eve voice didnt work well at all once fights started and was choppy at best during heave loads. I have had problems with grid loading ion TQ but didnt have any problems with grid loading in this test.

trying to type this post the message would jump up and down allt he time causeing this to be hard to type.

Illadelph Justice
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2010.09.09 22:59:00 - [547]
 

Machine Info


* Which test you were in: September 9 @ 20.00

* OS version : XP 32 bits

* CPU : x2 Intel Pentium D CPU 2.80GHz

* GPU : Nvidia GeForce 8800GT

* RAM : 4GB


User Experience


* Did you have Audio enabled?
Yes. Worked fine. As did EVE Voice.

* Did you have brackets turned on?
No.

* Average FPS during the test(s):
ranged from 4 to 15

* Did you notice any desyncs during the test?
Lots of module lag, lots of guns not firing, had to relog when we did the first jump because I landed 1 million km off the gate and could not warp back.

* On a scale of 1-10, how would you compare FPS and performance between this test and TQ? (1=way worse, 5=same, 10=OMG this is awesome) :
5. Though it did seem much better than the last mass test I did, and with more people.

* Describe your experience, make comments, suggestions, etc.
- Jump tests:
Jumping was terrible. Like I said, I had to relog after the first jump. The second jump put me 1 mil km off again but i was able to warp back. The last jump the grid actually loaded.

- Combat tests:
Guns kept cycling, even with auto-repeat off. Had to ungroup guns. Also, by the end of the test I could not use my guns at all. I was in a heavy interdictor, and could use focused warp disruption fine, but not shoot my guns.

It was, however, significantly more playable than in previous tests.

Lady Croft
Posted - 2010.09.09 23:03:00 - [548]
 

Machine Info:

Test: September 9, 2010 @ 20:00 UTC
OS version: Windows 7 64-bit
CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550
GPU: Nvidia Gefore GTX 260
RAM: 4GB

User Experience:

Did you have Audio enabled?
Yes

Did you have brackets turned on?
Yes

Average FPS during the test(s)
Between 20 - 25

•Did you notice any desyncs during the test?
No

•On a scale of 1-10, how would you compare FPS and performance between this test and TQ? (1=way worse, 5=same, 10=OMG this is awesome)
6

•Describe your experience, make comments, suggestions, etc.
Over all the experience was good, I managed to eventually start attacking after about 30 seconds from locking targets on the primary.


Lunatitch
In Memory of ComTech
Posted - 2010.09.09 23:03:00 - [549]
 

Machine Info

Which test you were in: Sept 9thm 20:00
OS version: Win 7 Home Premium 64b
CPU: AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+ (2.5Ghz)
GPU: Club3D ATI HD3870
RAM: 4GB DDR2-800

User Experience
Did you have Audio enabled?
No, except voice.

Did you have brackets turned on?
Only for Stargates.

Average FPS during the test(s)
During fight: Between 5-15 FPS , During Gatesitting: 30-60 FPS

Did you notice any desyncs during the test?
Not really, though massive module lag at the beginning of the fight.

On a scale of 1-10, how would you compare FPS and performance between this test and TQ?
Don't really have anything to compare with... Gate jumping went a hell of a lot quicker though!

Describe your experience, make comments, suggestions, etc.
Gate Jumping was a lot quicker when you only click once... Module lag at beginning of the fight was really bad. Got NoGrid once during the "spam button" session. Log can be found here: http://home.deds.nl/~adrian/ADRIAN-PC.2010.09.09.21.50.09.ERRORS.7z

kupermobileshell
Posted - 2010.09.09 23:04:00 - [550]
 

Machine Info


* Which test you were in: September 9th 2010

* OS version: windows 7 ultimate x64

* CPU Intel Core i7 860

* GPU ATI HD4850 1Gb

* RAM 4GB Dual


User Experience


* Did you have Audio enabled? Yes

* Did you have brackets turned on? No

* Average FPS during the test(s) during gathering 40 - 60 during fight 3-25

* Did you notice any desyncs during the test? No

* On a scale of 1-10, how would you compare FPS and performance between this test and TQ? (1=way worse, 5=same, 10=OMG this is awesome) can compare only with previous test in august's test with smartbombs - 7

* Describe your experience, make comments, suggestions, etc.

Module lag is much better. Even shot few guys.
Saw bug with targeting when we was near gates to check jump spam - some time i just cant target, then when i locked target - i was kicked from fleet. Two times in a row.

Ban Doga
Posted - 2010.09.09 23:05:00 - [551]
 

Vista 64 bit
Intel E8400
Nvidia GTX 285
8 GB RAM

Audio and Voice enabled (joined both channels)
Brackets on
Desync: rubber-banding, ammo not loading, ships suddenly vanishing
Score: 5

I skipped a couple of tests (prolly 2-3 months or so).

I honestly fail to see improvements compared to tests we had in May.
Module lag, jumping lag, grid loading lag, targeting lag... you name it.

Happily running a shield booster without using cap and firing without using ammo - and without dealing damage.
Manually cycling weapons is still as necessary as it was before you announced your fix for stuck modules.

Changing ammo during the fight was horrible.
Sometimes the request would only unload the weapon but not reload any new ammo.
Combined with a general module delay of 10 seconds makes for very interesting fights.

People were still reporting upload limits of 2 MB for the log server files in the bug reports, despite being told the limit is/will be raised to 16 MB since those tests started.

Tobin Shalim
Eclipse Industrials
Quantum Forge
Posted - 2010.09.09 23:09:00 - [552]
 

Machine Info

Which test you were in: September 9, 2010

OS version: Win7 64

CPU: AMD Athlon 2400

GPU: ATI Radeon 4870HD

RAM: 2GB


User Experience

Did you have Audio enabled? No, only voice.

Did you have brackets turned on? No.

Average FPS during the test(s) Varied. Before the fighting, I was getting about 35-40FPS with just the jumps into the systems. When it came to fighting, the FPS was more like 1-4 and that was with me zoomed all the way out.

Did you notice any desyncs during the test? No. People in fleet claimed they had it though.

On a scale of 1-10, how would you compare FPS and performance between this test and TQ? (1=way worse, 5=same, 10=OMG this is awesome) 1.

Describe your experience, make comments, suggestions, etc.

-Jumping was pretty bad. Every single time I got tied up in traffic control which took me 3 minutes to get through. And then I had to load grid on the opposite side, which took about another 1-3 minutes on average to load up. Every time except 1 I loaded 999km away from gate.

-Module lag was pretty nonexistent for me. Locking lag was there on occasion, but wasn't quite bad, it was more FPS being very low for me.

noonelikesme
Posted - 2010.09.09 23:19:00 - [553]
 

sep 9 20:00
windows 7
intel e8500
nvidia 9800
4 gigs

bug report 100152 for dxdiag and log server files

audo was enabled
no brackets on
average fps less than 15
multiple dsyncs on target locking
only bad experience is update few hrs before test hampered my able to get on sooner. all files i update on sisi all require full downloads of client.

Sabaitor
Posted - 2010.09.09 23:19:00 - [554]
 

Machine Info


* Which test you were in: 9th September

* OS version: Vista Home Premium 9 (service pack 2)

* CPU: Intel Q6600

* GPU: ATI Radeon HD 3800 Series

* RAM: 4GB


User Experience


* Did you have Audio enabled? Yes

* Did you have brackets turned on? No

* Average FPS during the test(s): 10-15fps

* Did you notice any desyncs during the test? Yes, 3 times when warping to the planets during fights.

* On a scale of 1-10, how would you compare FPS and performance between this test and TQ? (1=way worse, 5=same, 10=OMG this is awesome) 6

* Describe your experience, make comments, suggestions, etc. Lag was quite significant for me, I was unable to lock any target and my pod only appeared about 4mins after my ship was destroyed.

Moleculor
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
Posted - 2010.09.09 23:20:00 - [555]
 

Edited by: Moleculor on 09/09/2010 23:27:07
The launcher makes testing far easier and more convenient.

Test: September 09, 2010
OS: Win XP Pro (32 bit)
CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 3.0Ghz
GPU: Nvidia 9500 GT
RAM: 2GB

Audio on.
Brackets off (during testing events)
Average FPS: 7.5
Desynchs: What? What're those? There were a few times where I spent two-four minutes in a ship that was dead but I wasn't in my pod yet, but it eventually was ok.
Comparison: I'm not experienced enough with TQ to determine comparisons.

Jump 1: Spammed jump. Took about three minutes, during which I was "jumped out" but hadn't switched systems yet, kept receiving "Session change in progress" messages. I ended up in the system eventually 999,990m off of the gate, decloaked.

Jump 2: Spammed jump. Exact same experience as first jump, except I jumped in at the gate, 12km off.

Subsequent spamming jumps were identical to Jump 2. The one jump where we weren't supposed to spam, I got traffic control warnings that ended about 30 seconds prematurely (with me jumping successfully into the next system).

First fight: I'm new to fleet battles, but basically my modules kept getting "stuck" on or off, etc, and then I "died" and spent five or so minutes "in" my ship that was already dead, despite the fact that I should be in my pod.

Second fight: I was in another system trying to re-equip a new ship. Jumping back into the system was slow (took a couple minutes for the system to change). When I re-entered the fight, I had the same results as the first one: Stuck modules, five minutes to "die", etc.

http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/Moleculor/LogServer09.09.2010.zip

Roa Ga'an
Caldari
Stormlord Battleforce
Posted - 2010.09.09 23:24:00 - [556]
 

Mass Server Test on: September 9th @ 20:00 UTC

OS version: Windows 7 64bit

CPU: Phenom II x 4 965

GPU: Sapphire HD 4850X2

RAM: 4gb DDR3 1066

Did you have audio enabled: Yes

Did you have brackets turned on: Yes

Average FPS during tests:
(1) During Jump tests FPS avg @ 20
(2) During Fights FPS avg @ 6

Did you notice any desyncs during the test?:
Only desync encountered was after test was offically
over, tried to scoop some drones but they were not
appearing at the correct range relative to my ship.
However, this problem corrected itself after a few
moments.


On a scale of 1-10 How would you compare FPS and performance between this test an TQ: Rates as 5

Describe you experience, make comments, suggestions, etc. :

Overall a positive experience, once ppl on grid dropped below 250 mark performance improved greatly which would be superior to past experiences on TQ. Was disappointed in the lack of control on the part of the players.


Glyken Touchon
Gallente
Independent Alchemists
Posted - 2010.09.09 23:34:00 - [557]
 

Edited by: Glyken Touchon on 09/09/2010 23:37:37
Machine Info

Which test you were in: (ex. March 6 @ 19:00)
September 9th 20:00

OS version (XP, Vista 64bit, OS X, Linux - Fedora, etc.)
vista 32

CPU (ex. AMD X2 6000+, Intel E6400, etc)
Intel Centrino Core 2 Duo 1.66ghz

GPU (ex. ATI 2950, Nvidia 8800, etc)
ATI Mobility Radeon HD2400

RAM (ex. 2GB, 4GB, etc.)
2gb

User Experience

Did you have Audio enabled?
yes, including voice

Did you have brackets turned on?
no

Average FPS during the test(s)
5ish zoomed out

Did you notice any desyncs during the test?
up to about 20seconds during the fights

On a scale of 1-10, how would you compare FPS and performance between this test and TQ? (1=way worse, 5=same, 10=OMG this is awesome)
don't really get involved in big fights on TQ

Describe your experience, make comments, suggestions, etc.
jumps went fairly smoothly considering numbers: failed to load grid/overview only once, traffic control was as expected. Overview was very slow updating. Eve voice failed near end of test (may be my hardware though for that...

Monsterpringels
Posted - 2010.09.09 23:43:00 - [558]
 

Test: 20-Feb-2010 20:00 EVE Time
OS: XP Professional
CPU: AMD Athlon[tm]64 Processor 3500+ 2,19GHz
GPU: NVidea G Force 9500 GT 512M DDR 2
RAM: 3 GB

Did you have Audio enabled?

enabled. It has worked

Did you have brackets turned on?

brackets was off (without fight Avg fps 20 (zoomed out all the way) to 12 (zoomed in all the way)

Average FPS during the test(s)

Avg fps 3,4 (zoomed out all the way) to 0,9 (zoomed in all the way)[in fight]
I was warped off from the battlefield and the FPS moved on 60, but goes down in the fight / and in the fleet on the gate.
Did you notice any desyncs during the test?

My missile launchers was cycled over and over 6-15 times before they have start the next missiles.

On a scale of 1-10, how would you compare FPS and performance between this test and TQ? (1=way worse, 5=same, 10=OMG this is awesome)

this was my first time for me, that i could be help at the test, my fps was bad but the fun was really high 5-6

Describe your experience, make comments, suggestions, etc.

my experience: it was my first fight with so many ships and i have had a lot of fun.
And I'm sorry, but my English is not good, but I try to post my best in English.

stromhelm
Posted - 2010.09.10 00:07:00 - [559]
 

Machine Info


* Which test you were in: 9th September

* OS version: Vista Home Premium

* CPU: AMD Athlon 64 X2

* GPU: ATI Radeon HD 3200 Series

* RAM: 3GB


User Experience


* Did you have Audio enabled? Half the mass test yes, after i had to relog due to no grid loading after jumping thought a gate

* Did you have brackets turned on? No

* Average FPS during the test(s): 10fps

* Did you notice any desyncs during the test? apart from 1 after spaming the jump button thought a stargate

* On a scale of 1-10, how would you compare FPS and performance between this test and TQ? (1=way worse, 5=same, 10=OMG this is awesome) 6

* Describe your experience, make comments, suggestions, etc. Lag was fairly bad but to a degree manageable, besides the silly folks not listening to deve and just blatantly not reading (e.g people using bombs and continuing to shoot even after deve had said not to use bombs and to stop shooting..)

DarkCaveman
Posted - 2010.09.10 00:10:00 - [560]
 

Machine Info


* Which test you were in: September 9 @ 20:00 eve

* OS version windows XP pro

* CPU AMD Athlon II 4200+

* GPU NVidia 7800GT

* RAM 2GB Ram


User Experience


* Did you have Audio enabled? yes

* Did you have brackets turned on? no

* Average FPS during the test(s) 6FPS

* Did you notice any desyncs during the test? most jumps were to 1m km from gate. module lag

* On a scale of 1-10, how would you compare FPS and performance between this test and TQ? 1, but I don't regularly do large fleet engagements to make a reasonable comparison. I was outside Jita 4-4 on Sunday for that test, and that seemed to perform better than today, but I can't say I got an accurate count of ships outside of station there.

* Describe your experience, make comments, suggestions, etc.
Enjoyed the new experience of the mass test, but the lag while jumping and in battle was really unusable. FPS was down around 1.5-2, and even the displays (health, cap) seemed to get out of sync.

Dreaee
Posted - 2010.09.10 00:19:00 - [561]
 

Machine Info


* September 9th @ 20:00

* Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit

* Intel E8400 Wolfdale @ 3.0 GHz

* nVidia GeForce 9800 GT

* 4GB DDR2

User Experience


* Did you have Audio enabled? No, only voice

* Did you have brackets turned on? Partially, fleet members and drones were removed

* Average FPS during the test(s) 55ish

* Did you notice any desyncs during the test? If by desync you mean long period of lag where I can't do anything, then yes.

* On a scale of 1-10, how would you compare FPS and performance between this test and TQ? (1=way worse, 5=same, 10=OMG this is awesome) Don't know, haven't been in any fleets this size on TQ

* Describe your experience, make comments, suggestions, etc. Grid loading didn't seem too bad. Module response started out good but once the fleets starting fighting it was still pretty bad. It picked up as the fight progressed, presumably because people were dying.

j731
Posted - 2010.09.10 00:31:00 - [562]
 

Machine Info

Which test you were in: (ex. March 6 @ 19:00)
Sept 9
OS version (XP, Vista 64bit, OS X, Linux - Fedora, etc.)
Vista 64
CPU (ex. AMD X2 6000+, Intel E6400, etc)
Intel Quad Q6700
GPU (ex. ATI 2950, Nvidia 8800, etc)
GeForce 8600 GT
RAM (ex. 2GB, 4GB, etc.)
4 Gigs

User Experience

Did you have Audio enabled?
Yes, with music at 0. Eve Voice enabled.
Did you have brackets turned on?
No.
Average FPS during the test(s)
5 with all effects. 10 up close in the blob with effects off. 20+ in the blob w/ the camera pulled out.
Did you notice any desyncs during the test? No.

On a scale of 1-10, how would you compare FPS and performance between this test and TQ? (1=way worse, 5=same, 10=OMG this is awesome) No comparison. I've never been in a blob as big as the one today.

Describe your experience, make comments, suggestions, etc.

Silent Twilight
Gallente
Posted - 2010.09.10 00:37:00 - [563]
 

Edited by: Silent Twilight on 10/09/2010 00:40:55
Machine Info
* Which test you were in: 9-10 Sept. 2010 - Fleet X
* OS version: winXP Pro SP2 32-bit
* CPU: Core 2 Duo @ 3.00 GHz
* GPU: nVidia GeForce 8800GT
* RAM: 2 GB

User Experience
* Did you have Audio enabled?
Yes. Had problems with Fleet Voice. Could hear people from other squads, but not the FC and one or two other guys. When FC was speaking, I could hear only a slight static noise. Tried to rejoin audio channel and switch hear/speak icons on the Fleet channel, but nothing worked.

* Did you have brackets turned on?
No.

* Average FPS during the test(s)
Around 50 at gates and during warp zoomed out.
~20 at gates zoomed in.
~1-5 during the fight

* Did you notice any desyncs during the test?
A few times, after fleet warp into the fight. Most notable was the warp to... I think it was Poitot I, when after the warp we stopped and saw a lonely T3 cruiser in the overview, and then we suddenly 're-stopped' into the enemy fleet.

* Describe your experience, make comments, suggestions, etc.
In general, fights were awfully laggy.
For the first time I've encountered guns cycling without stopping even after their target was already dead. Had to hit them one or two times to make them stop. Once had a glitch with changing ammo (had 2 groups of 2 Dual 250 mm-s and one group of 2 250 mm). One group of Duals and the group of 250mm-s reloaded normally, but the remaining group of Duals remained with old ammo and kept saying that it has run out of charges until I manually unloaded ammo to cargo and loaded new ammo into the group.
Drones and locking were very laggy as well. Had to wait for ages to complete locking and to pull drones out/in. Initially I had drones in separate groups, but during the fight sometimes they returned to drone bay or deployed outside their group. Also one sentry drone disappeared during scooping them back after the fight near the planet and reappeared a few moments later in warp.

As for gate jumps, the first one with spam was the worst. I've waited for 3 minutes. After that I jumped through, and local was OK, but the grid was missing for more than 5 minutes. Had to relog to fix it. Also had the average FPS number displayed, but no respective curve. Second time I've waited for the same time, but ater jumping in grid loaded several seconds later, and FPS curve was there. Loaded 1 mil km from the gate. Third time I came out already normally near the gate. In all 3 cases during button spam I noticed that 'jump already in progress' sound could be heard at the beginning, but at some point it stopped. And that began at least a minute before the actual jump, not right before it. Traffic control during the single-click jump into the gate camp. Waited for some time to load grid after that.

On the bright side, didn't have those 'sticky' drone icons on targets this time. And lag was bad, but I haven't encountered such bad freezes as during the previous test. Possibly, thanks to lowering graphics settings from highest to medium and switching off drone and gun models.


P.S. People really should be clearly notified that no jumping occurs before the "JUMP" command from a CCP guy. Every time there is a bunch of button-happy pilots jumping right after the words like 'Now we will be jumping to MH with button spam'. Put the no order - no action line into MOtD, system notice or any other globally visible place.

//Two pieces of logserver results sent via bug report.

Squatch
Caldari
Defenders of the Faith
Posted - 2010.09.10 01:30:00 - [564]
 

Machine Info

  • Which test you were in: September 9th, 20:00

  • OS version: Windows 7 Professional x64

  • CPU: Intel Q9505

  • GPU: ATI HD4890 1GB + nVidia 9800GT 512MB each card driving a 23" 1920x1080 monitor with a 1700x1000 windowed client.

  • RAM: 4GB


User Experience


  • Did you have Audio enabled? Yes on both clients. Only ran eve voice on a single client

  • Did you have brackets turned on? Yes

  • Average FPS during the test(s) 15-20 during fights, 30 sitting on gate, 60 warping around

  • Did you notice any desyncs during the test? No. Noticed the logserver crashed as I neglected to place it into server mode. Confused

  • On a scale of 1-10, how would you compare FPS and performance between this test and TQ? (1=way worse, 5=same, 10=OMG this is awesome) Unfortunately I have no basis for comparison, as I'm not involved in large fleet actions on TQ. Came today to offer what help/support I could.

  • Describe your experience, make comments, suggestions, etc.

ChcknSndwh
Posted - 2010.09.10 02:15:00 - [565]
 

Edited by: ChcknSndwh on 10/09/2010 02:17:58
Machine Info

* Which test you were in: September 9th, 20:00

* OS version: Windows 7 Professional x64

* CPU: AMD Phenom 9650 Quad-Core Processor 2.30 GHz

* GPU: ATI HD4870 1GB

* RAM: 8GB



User Experience


* Did you have Audio enabled? Yes and worked fairly well

* Did you have brackets turned on? Yes

* Average FPS during the test(s) At Gate varied from 10 - 50ish, fleet fights i had to crank everything down to low and everything off to get about 0.5 FPS

* Did you notice any desyncs during the test? Yes, if desyncs you mean starting a modual and it not responding for a few secs, and or deploying drones and they take a total of 3 mins before all 5 of them deploy.

* On a scale of 1-10, how would you compare FPS and performance between this test and TQ? (1=way worse, 5=same, 10=OMG this is awesome) Have not been in a large fleet battle for awhile.

* Describe your experience, make comments, suggestions, etc.

I think it went well but Fleet battles did bog down the whole game by a lot and if this was a tranquility fight where billions of isk are at stake I can see why so many make such a huge complaint over it. Overall i enjoyed it and if i get a chance i will try to make the next one in the fight against lag. Smile

Tiberium Jakob
Caldari
Metalworks
Majesta Empire
Posted - 2010.09.10 02:35:00 - [566]
 

Machine Info


* Which test you were in: September 9 @ 20:00

* OS version: Windows 7 64bit

* CPU: Core 2 6600

* GPU: ATI Radeon HD 5800

* RAM: 8GB


User Experience


* Did you have Audio enabled? YES

* Did you have brackets turned on? NO / Most effects off

* Average FPS during the test(s) 20fps during jumps
7fps during fights

* Did you notice any desyncs during the test? YES, desyned once during the third jump.

* On a scale of 1-10, how would you compare FPS and performance between this test and TQ? 7

* Describe your experience, make comments, suggestions, etc.
This was one of the best test sessions yet. Yes, during the fight the fps was low and lag was high but there was also 500 of us. I was able to cycle my modules on and off (first time for this) and control my drones. There was some delay on both but controllable.

Javniwod
Posted - 2010.09.10 02:49:00 - [567]
 

Machine Info

Which test you were in: Sept 9thm 20:00
OS version: Win XP Premium 32b
CPU: Intel P4 (2.53Ghz)(old clunker)
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce 7600GT
RAM: 2GB

User Experience:
Did you have Audio enabled?
Yes, Fleet Voice.

Did you have brackets turned on?
No.

Average FPS during the test(s)
During fight: Between .01-1 FPS zoomed out , Fleet Warping 4.5-2 FPS, During Gatesitting and Alignment: 7-2 FPS

Did you notice any desyncs during the test?
Not really, so much lag that by the time I got target lock target had already been killed though module lag during the fight was ok.

On a scale of 1-10, how would you compare FPS and performance between this test and TQ?
Don't really have anything to compare with... not been on massive fleet combats on TQ - yet!

Describe your experience, make comments, suggestions, etc.
Compared to tests a few months ago for the last 2 tests I have actually been able to target lock and shoot, watch ships moving and combat, Yes I have a clunker of a PC so this has made me a happy pilot to be able to participate and hopefully for the betterment of TQ.

I have many many logs of this event over 50mb zipped, let me know if you want them...

Lukesf4
Posted - 2010.09.10 02:59:00 - [568]
 

Edited by: Lukesf4 on 10/09/2010 02:59:25
can you wait a extra few minutes before starting? the singularity client had a fatal error and refused to launch so i had to download, i'm almost done with the download so please wait about 10 extra minutes for me

edit: character is lukesf3, forgot to change the name on here

Nilanni
Posted - 2010.09.10 03:09:00 - [569]
 

Edited by: Nilanni on 10/09/2010 03:17:07
Machine Info

* Which test you were in: September 9th, 20:00

* OS version: Windows XP Professional x64

* CPU: Intel Core2 Quad Q9400 2.66GHz

* GPU: GeForce GTX 260 896MB, 24" 1920x1080 display, windowed client, AA + HDR, max graphics settings

* RAM: 4GB


User Experience

* Did you have Audio enabled? Yes, eve voice for fleet

* Did you have brackets turned on? No!

* Average FPS during the tests? 2-3 during jump session changing, 55-60 after jump & during warp, 20-30 during fights

* Did you notice any desyncs during the test? No. Modules lagged a bit, but worked.

* On a scale of 1-10, how would you compare FPS and performance between this test and TQ? (1=way worse, 5=same, 10=OMG this is awesome) 7

* Describe your experience, make comments, suggestions, etc. ~

Last time I was able to participate was in March & the results were horrible, no fleet voice, jump took 5 minutes, no grid, died in a blind turkey shoot, couldn't even get a pod out of the deal, had to log.

In contrast, this time all jumps worked, grid loaded, modules cycled, even drones were obedient. Although all these things were suffering various degrees of delayed response, it was minor relative to past descriptions.

Was zoomed up close & personal, no brackets, effects, or drone models.

Jumps took 3-5 minutes for the session change, but once the screen finally went black, grid loaded within 15 seconds or less. Spamming the jump button didn't seem to change much from my pov. Two of the jumps landed a million km out.

Fleet voice worked well initially, but seemed to die off & on during the last big fight (or maybe they took the hints and muted themselves, dunno).

Grouped lasers functioned without trouble. "Your group of Heavy Modulated Pulse Energy Beam I is well aimed ... , inflicting 1284.9 damage"

Was able to warp out, dock, repair, return to fight, no hangups or freezes.

So, it would seem that things have improved, especially with over 600 in local. Good job, keep it up, & thanks for the test skillpoints! Also, the massmoveme bot was crucial, without it I wouldn't have made the test in time. Good move.

edit: lolwut Lukes??

Balthazar Damner
Dark-Rising
Executive Outcomes
Posted - 2010.09.10 05:27:00 - [570]
 

Test : 09.09.2010
OS : XP
CPU : Intel 2.5Ghz DualCore
GPU : GeForce 8700 GT
RAM : 3 GB

Audio : yes
Brackets : yes
FPS : 55fps zoomed far out, 12fps close in during jump tests; 30/8 during fights
desynch : no
compare to TQ : 7

Jumping was slow, as to be expected with that amount of players. jump to poitot ended up 1mio km off gate.
Module lag in the fights was manageable. Switching ammo on grid during the fight (grouped guns in stacks of 4) ended in unresponsive stack with mix of different crystals and empty guns.
Targeting was very slow with the process repeating over and over and would sometimes just fizzle.
Trying to view character info of other pilot during the fight produced empty window.


-log file goes where?-


Pages: first : previous : ... 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 23 ... : last (27)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only