open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: Tyrannis Performance Improvements
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5

Author Topic

Depili
Blood Works Inc.
Circle-Of-Two
Posted - 2010.07.07 23:46:00 - [31]
 

So let me get this straight, you have used the 7 months of mass testing for improving our FPS a little while we stare at the black screen or wait 30mins to get out of our exploding ship? In other words stuff that has zero impact on the enjoyment and feasibility of fleet fights?

I can't express how disappointing this is.

Swidgen
Posted - 2010.07.07 23:56:00 - [32]
 

Thank you for an interesting and informative devblog. I waste no time hammering on you guys when I think you've dropped the ball (no pun intended), so it's only fair that I praise you when you deserve it. Good job on the level of detail and explaining a little about how it all works under the covers.

Radgette
Posted - 2010.07.08 00:05:00 - [33]
 

Originally by: Depili
So let me get this straight, you have used the 7 months of mass testing for improving our FPS a little while we stare at the black screen or wait 30mins to get out of our exploding ship? In other words stuff that has zero impact on the enjoyment and feasibility of fleet fights?

I can't express how disappointing this is.


seems that way :P oh and don't forget TEH TENGUS R CAUZING UR LAGZ

Mongo Edwards
Posted - 2010.07.08 00:11:00 - [34]
 

maybe that is why my Tengu "skips" sideways when I fire missiles.

Olivor
Posted - 2010.07.08 00:28:00 - [35]
 

This is seriously it for 7 months of testing?

Fearless M0F0
Incursion PWNAGE Asc
Posted - 2010.07.08 00:31:00 - [36]
 

Quote:
All the changes mentioned in this blog are client-side only, and will not solve any server-client lag that might exist. However, that should make playing a more stable, faster and more enjoyable experience.


Rolling Eyes

I quit participating in mass tests when it was apparent they were not helping you guys to figure out what you messed up in Dominion that screwed 0.0 fleet fights.

I was right, you were chasing dead balls in tengus Rolling Eyes

Don't get me wrong, it's cool our clients don't run out of memory that quickly anymore but I rather keep the memory leak relogging my client when it gets slow and have you guys use the manpower and figure out whats wrong with your server code dammit Evil or Very Mad

I won't join your mass tests anymore until you make one specifically to figure out your server side issues

ovenproofjet
Caldari
Therapy.
Posted - 2010.07.08 01:13:00 - [37]
 

Very interesting DevBlog, well done to CCP Blaze.

I was thinking the other day though that some lag could be produced by the fact that the fleet finder updates the FC on players locations, so surely when a large fleet jumps into a system thats bound to cause alot of calls or updates to the server and using some memory. Perhaps looking at this might solve some problems?

Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation
RONA Directorate
Posted - 2010.07.08 01:23:00 - [38]
 

Wow, so much hate, guys HTFU or GBTHKO, seriously. This is a very informative blog and is a good update on what is going on. First off, they are taking what man power they have available and trying to fix it asap. The client optimization and fixing client bugs are where most of the problems are going to come from. So give them some credit.

Now for my feedback -

Questions -

Does PI run on the same node as the constellation / Solar system? Say I was in Uedema editing a planet in that system when the PI window opens or PI editing goes on, is it attached to that node? IF SO, then maybe pi is causing additional memory usage not realized at one point.

#2.
While we are seeing client side fixes, have you been monitoring server side memory usage or statistics coming from the server? What can the server tell us about the fleet tests and mass tests?

#3. Did people in these tests remember to turn off drone models to increse effeciency?

#4 - As some of the time fights can escalate on TQ w/o warning or fleet fights on TQ can happen at times when DEVS are not around? Is there a automated system that could be implemented to record the activity of the fleet fight when devs are not around to monitor it? Say, node XXXXXX has 500 ships currently on it begin recording activity. This might help monitor how the server deals with the situation vs the client.

#5 - Jita, what happened =(

FugginNutz
Caldari
Trolls From Outer Space
Posted - 2010.07.08 01:24:00 - [39]
 

Because of TENGU????

Derp. ugh

Nice troll CCP.

SavageBastard
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.07.08 01:24:00 - [40]
 

Originally by: ovenproofjet
Very interesting DevBlog, well done to CCP Blaze.

I was thinking the other day though that some lag could be produced by the fact that the fleet finder updates the FC on players locations, so surely when a large fleet jumps into a system thats bound to cause alot of calls or updates to the server and using some memory. Perhaps looking at this might solve some problems?



The problems way, way predate this feature (which is awesome). If anything a huge amount has to do with the firing of guns which can turn a system from a laggy to paralytic almost instantly. It can't be the sole problem (or perhaps it simply exacerbates it) but it obviously contributes greatly.

Depili
Blood Works Inc.
Circle-Of-Two
Posted - 2010.07.08 01:30:00 - [41]
 

Originally by: SavageBastard
Originally by: ovenproofjet
Very interesting DevBlog, well done to CCP Blaze.

I was thinking the other day though that some lag could be produced by the fact that the fleet finder updates the FC on players locations, so surely when a large fleet jumps into a system thats bound to cause alot of calls or updates to the server and using some memory. Perhaps looking at this might solve some problems?



The problems way, way predate this feature (which is awesome). If anything a huge amount has to do with the firing of guns which can turn a system from a laggy to paralytic almost instantly. It can't be the sole problem (or perhaps it simply exacerbates it) but it obviously contributes greatly.


Yeah, 1000 people just chilling on a node isn't too bad, but 200 people shooting at a static structure (pos, ihub, station what ever) makes the node crawl, not to mention 100 people shooting other 100 people...

Caladain Barton
Navy of Xoc
The Remnant Legion
Posted - 2010.07.08 02:12:00 - [42]
 

Originally by: Obsidian Hawk
Wow, so much hate, guys HTFU or GBTHKO, seriously. This is a very informative blog and is a good update on what is going on. First off, they are taking what man power they have available and trying to fix it asap. The client optimization and fixing client bugs are where most of the problems are going to come from. So give them some credit.


Your ignorance is showing. All the game crippling lag is server side.

Ada Veer
Caldari
Rule of Five
Posted - 2010.07.08 02:27:00 - [43]
 

Edited by: Ada Veer on 08/07/2010 03:00:24
Does this mean that we can expect dynamically generated volumetric nebulas?

I want the scenery to move when I'm in warp!! I want each solar system to be beautiful and unique like the planets do! I want to see more civilian shuttles and can we see CONCORD fly in fleet formation? Battleships with squadrons of frigates would look so cool! NPC civilian busses and airliners flying around high security space - like Fifth Element's floating hotel!

EDIT: I should add that we're supposed to be demigods, yet where are all the people we're supposed to rule? I know they're coming to the planets, but I want stations and stargates and everywhere else in the EVE universe to be buzzing with civilian craft, large and small.

Very Happy

Selene D'Celeste
Caldari
The D'Celeste Trading Company
ISK Six
Posted - 2010.07.08 03:20:00 - [44]
 

Very nice blog! Also "destiny balls"? Seriously? I felt bad for Blaze when I read that.

WhiteSavage
Gallente
Ever Flow
Systematic-Chaos
Posted - 2010.07.08 04:00:00 - [45]
 

Edited by: WhiteSavage on 08/07/2010 04:09:36
I posted an angry rant but nvm...

just "meh"

would like some information as to why post-dominion all these problems started coming up. Why post-dominion do i now backscreen and die while jumping into a 250 man fleet?

Blog was informative, and glad to know people in CCP are working on what matters to us as players. But... these seem to be quite small fixes to a massive, massive, game-changing problem.

Darth Vapour
Posted - 2010.07.08 04:43:00 - [46]
 

Quote:
Nearing the launch of Tyrannis, it was clear that client performance in fleet fights had gotten pretty bad.


Now what about the pretty bad server performance we've had since Dominion ? Even if you were to fix all these client issues the traffic control, emergency warps, stuck guns and black screens seen when you try to move more then 50 ships or, god forbid, try to fight another fleet remain the biggest problem.

Freddybear
Posted - 2010.07.08 05:36:00 - [47]
 

Originally by: SavageBastard

I should add that I think CCP needs to come up with a system where developers are able to play in and with large alliances in a structured manner that is monitored internally. Nobody wants a return to the T20 days, but if so many of these lag problems are news to you (as you mentioned learning about some of them from the CSM) then it is clear that none of you are actually involved with players on the ground floor. In the developing that I've done with games, the best changes I ever made all came from playing the game in the manner that my players actually played it instead of simply reacting to bug reports and server load tests. Please consider this.


What makes you so sure the devs aren't playing the game in all the big alliances already and always have? Even during and after the T20 incident?
Beyond that however, a dev doesn't really have to be seen to be in local watching you masturb...... Err, gate camp or whatever you are doing there.
Dev-hax means they can jump anywhere in the universe at any time and be invisible to everyone... He could be targeting 50 ships at a time and activate 50 imaginary turrets on each target. The reason devs want stress tests on sisi is for the sake of a clean testing environment. To find problems you have to eliminate as much static as possible. That can't be done on TQ unfortunately because there are so many variables that could be the cause of so many problems.

While the experience you have is very real (lag) it doesn't help the devs fixing it if they simply sit there watching it happen.
And i am pretty sure they are aware of how laggy it is, they are also aware of how hard it is to determina WHY it's lagging more than it really should.

Darth Vapour
Posted - 2010.07.08 06:17:00 - [48]
 

Originally by: Freddybear

While the experience you have is very real (lag) it doesn't help the devs fixing it if they simply sit there watching it happen.
And i am pretty sure they are aware of how laggy it is, they are also aware of how hard it is to determina WHY it's lagging more than it really should.


You must have missed Vuk Lau's report from the CCP/CSM meeting where the devs were unaware of how gun cycling could be partially negated by the players.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2010.07.08 06:55:00 - [49]
 

Originally by: Yuda Mann
WTF? Why is CCP always working on dumb stuff that doesn't matter? FIX LAG NAO!

oh wait

They always have been, haven't they?


Well except for the trivial detail that it's even actually worse now than it was before.

Nareg Maxence
Gallente
Posted - 2010.07.08 07:59:00 - [50]
 

For Pete's sake CCP?! You can have 80mb! As long as you don't have it again every time I click my map.

As an explorer I need instant map loading.

Irumani
Gallente
hirr
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2010.07.08 08:03:00 - [51]
 

Originally by: SavageBastard
Edited by: SavageBastard on 07/07/2010 22:34:33

This is great and it's a relief to know that there is still work being actively done on this but it's still obviously not enough. This time last year the game worked better than it ever had in large fleet fights. Things were laggy but they worked and worked fairly reliably. Grids loaded, you could cyno in to laggy system and 1400 man fleet fights were entirely manageable while multiboxing. Currently, an unreinforced system can get laggy with just 100 people in it. I was disappointed that there was no mention of working on why one side of a fight can load a grid just fine and the other simply won't load it at all, particularly when jumping into heavily populated systems. Currently all of 0.0 is essentially "broken" as a result of this and tactics are almost entirely centered on making the other side have to jump into your fleet instead of you into theirs. Strategic objectives are often passed by simply because it would be too risky to get the kinds of ships into the system that would be required to take them. The best way to conquer space currently is not to drop SBUs and engage hostile fleets but to essentially grief the enemy into no longer wanting to live there.

For those of us who play the game entirely for the sandbox element and the scale of conquest and alliance battle, it would certainly be more heartening if CCP was much more visibly and aggressively addressing those core issues of grid and system loading and module cycling. You literally sell the game based on the concept of 0.0 warfare. We would very much appreciate if any of it was working. We do not expect a lag-free environment but a return to March 2009 performance levels would be a relief beyond what I could articulate here and it would make the sov system that you all worked so very hard on actually usable.



*edit*

I should add that I think CCP needs to come up with a system where developers are able to play in and with large alliances in a structured manner that is monitored internally. Nobody wants a return to the T20 days, but if so many of these lag problems are news to you (as you mentioned learning about some of them from the CSM) then it is clear that none of you are actually involved with players on the ground floor. In the developing that I've done with games, the best changes I ever made all came from playing the game in the manner that my players actually played it instead of simply reacting to bug reports and server load tests. Please consider this.


Quoted for massive and saddening truth.

The nullsec game is broken, and I'm sure every nullsec player want to be sure CCP understands the problem fully. We all know a better understanding of the problem can lead to a better fix, so please CCP, get someone in any nullsec alliance for a week or two, joining fleets and playing at the same level we all do. You'll see by yourselves all the mess nullsec currently is.

Fixing client-side issues is cool. Getting the game to run at pre-Dominion levels would be awesome.

Shirrath
Posted - 2010.07.08 08:05:00 - [52]
 

Originally by: SavageBastard

I should add that I think CCP needs to come up with a system where developers are able to play in and with large alliances in a structured manner that is monitored internally. Nobody wants a return to the T20 days, but if so many of these lag problems are news to you (as you mentioned learning about some of them from the CSM) then it is clear that none of you are actually involved with players on the ground floor. In the developing that I've done with games, the best changes I ever made all came from playing the game in the manner that my players actually played it instead of simply reacting to bug reports and server load tests. Please consider this.

The devs of the game-that-should-not-be-named have a habit of watching certain events live. Just hanging around reinforced nodes with an (invisible) ISD frigate would be an improvement.

Dztrgovac
Posted - 2010.07.08 08:06:00 - [53]
 

Beloved CCP and noble community. It would appear a tiny issue is missing from this devblog, there are no mentions of serverside lag and desyinc related to major fleet engagements.

That is the main and worse problem EVE has now (and fear of clientside haxploits, but you are fixing that ASAP CCP right?). Serverside issues are what needs to be fixing, not making map load every time to save 80mb now when most people have more than 4GB of RAM.

Dierdra Vaal
Caldari
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2010.07.08 08:40:00 - [54]
 

Edited by: Dierdra Vaal on 08/07/2010 08:40:52
Originally by: Devblog
...
balls
...
balls
...
balls


looks like CCP are on their balls.

I also hope a devblog with more insights into the actual lag and mass tests is released soon - a few more FPS arent that useful when you're lagged out.

Eowarian D
Gallente
Indicium Technologies
Posted - 2010.07.08 08:49:00 - [55]
 

Nice blog, CCP Blaze!
Always good to know how the insides of the Eve Client are taken care off, and how.
Thanks for explaining and keep on the good work! Wink

Aineko Macx
Posted - 2010.07.08 09:01:00 - [56]
 

Let's see, since this was all client side, what remains:

General "lag" issues:
- Stuck guns/modules
- Actual server lag

Issues introduced with Dominion:
- The grid load issue
- The excessive amount of traffic control
- The client side performance issues associated with fleets
- Actual server lag (yes, again, as with Dominion it got worse)

Please give an update on those issues, since this devblog there has been no communication at all about the progress.

Ariane VoxDei
Posted - 2010.07.08 09:07:00 - [57]
 

Originally by: devblog
In Tyrannis 1.0.2, we deployed changes that do more targeted updates of overview entries and brackets when a player joins/leaves your fleet, rather than updating them all. The fleet window performance was further improved by adding/removing the player from the member list rather than reloading the whole list.
That those are supposedly actual things that went live is so jawdroppingly bad judgement/coding that it defies belief. I would much rather believe that you MADE IT UP in order to have something to throw to the wolves.
It's the equivalent of telling people to do a full client download instead of getting a much smaller patch, when the client needs to be updated. And doing that in a situation that requires near-realtime performance. It's not just shooting your own foot, it's sawing off one leg at the knee and the other at the hip.

btw nice timing as usual. You know what I mean, and I won't point it out.

Maksim Cammeren
Posted - 2010.07.08 09:08:00 - [58]
 

Thank you for the informative devblog.

I appreciate your hard work to make the game faster. I have been impressed by the improvement in client performance from the Tyrannis upgrade.

I play Eve on two different computers. My primary one is a high-performance desktop, but I also login from a netbook, whenever I need to do trading or update my skills (or anything but PvP).

After the Tyrannis upgrade, I get 1.5-2x FPS on my netbook, as well as half the amount of delay in opening the market, journal, or agent conversations. (After half a day of playing, the game slows down again, so there might still be some leaks). Before the update, the game was barely playable on a netbook.

Other people with low-end computers also likely noticed a difference.

On the powerful desktop, the improvements aren't as dramatic, but I am sure I would see them if I conduct some tests.

Now, as other players have mentioned, the remaining dragons are hiding on the server side. I have participated in the latest Sisi test and the lag during the battle made it completely unplayable for me. Let's hope that CCP collected sufficient data from these tests and bring similar improvements to the server side of the code.

Kwa Zulu
Minmatar
The Graduates
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2010.07.08 09:32:00 - [59]
 

Interesting blog, but it seems incomplete, most of the issues handled are client side, while the majority of the current lag problems is obviously serverside!

Nomad IV
Posted - 2010.07.08 09:42:00 - [60]
 

I can confirm the success with the client. Before I had problems with more than 2 clients, now I can start 4 without problems. BUT what is with the server side lag? With every upgrade since Dominion it's getting worse. Remember: There are many that won't new fancy stuff, they desire is much less lag.



Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5

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