open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: Need for MOAR Speed
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10]

Author Topic

Gneeznow
Minmatar
Ship spinners inc
Posted - 2010.08.16 22:26:00 - [271]
 

Oveur is a master counter-troll, good thread but still it seems like things are moving so slowly in eve, things that have been broken ages still dont get fixed for years at a time, and it still feels a bit like empty promises are being made, I thought fixing the sov (sbu) or fw bugs would be a bit higher on the list of priorities seeing as they effect so many people, or even simple changed that people have been asking for for a long time, like the old cyno effect back or rockets fixed.

Cade Windstalker
Caldari
Posted - 2010.08.17 05:47:00 - [272]
 

Originally by: Bhattran

Corporation Security/overhaul of roles etc has been brought up by the CSM and to CCP, it like all the other things Players want wait at the behest of CCP to decide to take it on or not, not being what we seem to get. We have had two years of CSM and things brought to CCP, they decide what/when/if they want/can/will do them.




Um, yes. Because they're the Game Designers. Eve is, at the end of the day, their baby, not yours, mine, or any other player's and they DO know it best. They've been working on the game for ten plus years. The oldest of us has been playing for, at best, seven and change? Eight if you count the Beta? Everyone just seems to have developed this sense of entitlement and "we know best" but not even any one person at CCP gets to "know best". No, not even the CEO, because if enough people tell him "that's a bad idea" then he's probably going to listen (and if he doesn't then he's probably going to have to fire a lot of people).

Development is a collaborative process and that fact that CCP even gives us, the players, a seat at the table is WAY more than they have to do. We just seem to think this means it's CCP with one vote and us with one vote. What it IS is us with one vote and each of the stakeholders within CCP with one vote. Infact if you read the CSM minutes and look at these threads then we're actually getting more weight than probably any of the teams at CCP get.

Oh and FFS people, CCP are not out to pad their wallets. If they were they'd have sold out ages ago and we'd be talking to Blizzard. Seriously people, you don't get into Game Design for the money, you get into publishing games for the money.

The only "right" we have is the right to pay to play their game as long as we haven't broken any rules (which are pretty lax by MMO standards) and if you are really THAT fed up with things then simply stop playing. It seems like a common thread with these "I'm leaving" posts is an unwillingness to take CCP at their word (even their VERY well explained word) so if you're not going to do that then there's nothing they can say that's going to help. Stuff doesn't get done over night (and it certainly doesn't get done on vacation) so what are you expecting exactly?

Tyby
Nex Exercitus
Raiden.
Posted - 2010.08.17 06:09:00 - [273]
 

hmm last night in 0-w 500+ in local, 0 lag. it's true we where just shooting structures,and allot of those 500 where docked, but still, 0(zero) lag was a very nice surprise Laughing
so, it looks like you guys are on the right track, keep it this way pls, me happy Embarassed

Nvee
Posted - 2010.08.17 11:47:00 - [274]
 

Is the chinese server on the same patch cycle? IE, is Lag exactly the same across both servers?

Omal Oma
Shadowed Command
Fatal Ascension
Posted - 2010.08.17 15:46:00 - [275]
 

Edited by: Omal Oma on 17/08/2010 15:54:51
Edited by: Omal Oma on 17/08/2010 15:47:21
Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
Originally by: Omal Oma
@CSM People.

I understand that you guys are trying to create a list of the most popular bugs/lack in polish, aspects of EVE which the majority of players would like to see fixed. There's a flaw in this logic, many of the problems in EVE affect a small number of players and these small number of players are many times too busy leading to take the time out to "complain". Take POS setup/takedown taking upwards of eight hours for example or the SBU bug (game breaking). While theses things aren't the most popular, I feel it's due to people in high command only being able to do these things, thus having a lower percentage of people to push support behind change.


With all due respect, the squeaky wheel gets the grease. There is an established procedure for raising issues for the CSM to consider, and if you don't use it, it's unreasonable to expect the CSM to do all the heavy lifting. Despite what some people would have you believe, we're not a bunch of know-it-alls with our own agendas; we depend on motivated players to craft proposals that we can submit to CCP. We are your representatives, after all.

As things stand, in the current environment, getting big changes made to the game is going to be difficult. So proposals that involve minimal changes to the game mechanics but make big differences in gameplay are your best shot. I for one would love to see the Dead Horse POS proposal implemented, but TBH it isn't going to happen anytime soon. But a set of small tweaks to the existing POS mechanics could make life a lot easier.

With respect to issues like the SBU bug, I assume it's been bugreported and acknowledged as a bug by CCP? If CCP is claiming they can't reproduce it, or it is working as designed, then raise a proposal and give us as much info as you can, and maybe we can twist some arms.


There's an example I'm going to give...

"Notify You cannot change your ship harmonic while your ship is inside of a force field or the resulting forces would tear it apart (your ship that is)."

If a corp is on the ball and can change the harmonic of a password to a POS, why is the POS simply ejecting the ship... Why isn't it blowing it up?

if standings = positive : eject
else if standings = neutral and nbsi : eject
else if standings = neutral and nrds : blow up
else if standings = negative : blow up

In my personal opinion, the game mechanics are catering to one side of the spectrum. For alliances as mine, we're trying to grow but the mechanics of the game cater too far against our ability to grow. The mechanics of the game cater to the super coalitions and blob warfare. They cater to more numbers in a system, to bring more to win rather than the people who do play smart and with honor. Wile my alliance is playing this game at a disadvantage by not exploring the "spy game", I think that it shouldn't hold such a weight against us. I also feel that these types of mechanics, while apart of the game, should have consequences if the party under siege is able to be on it's toes.

Things like this shouldn't take too much time to implement. An overhaul of corp permissions and security is a flaw and would take quite a bit of work to rectify. On the other hand, instituting changes who help tilt the massive disadvantage smaller alliances have wouldn't.

Thanks again for reading,
Omal.

Apollo Gabriel
Mercatoris
Etherium Cartel
Posted - 2010.08.17 17:15:00 - [276]
 

Originally by: Flibertygibbet
The lag is caused by lack of appeasement to our god Balor. A virgin must be sacrificed!


are you volunteering?

Iceland does have volcanoes we can toss you into.

Dragon Greg
Posted - 2010.08.17 17:32:00 - [277]
 

Originally by: Nvee
Is the chinese server on the same patch cycle? IE, is Lag exactly the same across both servers?


If I remember correctly, they're on Apocrypha atm.

Janya Rykayn
Posted - 2010.08.17 19:52:00 - [278]
 

I'd just like to point out that the people who are shouting about this are the ones who are having thousand-ship fleet battles.

Fix the lag, the fleet sizes will double and then you will have people shouting about lag in 2000-ship fleet battles.

I do understand what they're saying. But what I do about the aspects of the game that aren't to my liking is I change my behavior.

What these people are screaming about isn't fixable in the long term. Their own behavior is what is causing the problem, and if it's fixed the problem will only expand to fill the available space.

If it were ME-- and I'm not trying to say that I know better than the developers who have certainly discussed this option-- I would emplace a global ship limit. This limit might be adaptive based on system load.

Then whenever people start howling about lag, decrease the ship limit until the howling stops.

This is obviously not an ideal solution by any means but the level of rage about this issue is unarguably detrimental to the game. If new players get the idea that "eve is a laggy piece of crap," they may not want to try or get heavily involved in the game.

The angry people are a very small and very vocal part of the playerbase. Wouldn't it be terrible if a draconian solution were applied that only affected the people who are angry about the problem and who are causing the problem?

What they're doing is no different from people playing an FPS game, then having a 200-person clusterf*ck in one room, then complaining that the graphics are laggy.

I really hate fanboyism but get real, guys. Eve's server architecture is second to none. Nothing out there even comes close.

Really and truly, how many people out of a 300,000 player playerbase, are really enraged about performance during huge fleet fights? The squeaky wheel indeed. This is a system that works superlatively well under any reasonable load.

The closet is crowded and hot? Really? Maybe you should quit trying to cram thousands of people in there.

Matzumisi
Posted - 2010.08.18 01:19:00 - [279]
 

Unfortunately lag monster affects not only those "in the closet" but also people a few systems away if they are unlucky enough to be on the same node with the fight. People do what is necessary to win and as long as "bringing a bigger blob" means victory, the battles will grow in scale. People cram into the closet because it is the way to get cake.

Omal Oma
Shadowed Command
Fatal Ascension
Posted - 2010.08.18 01:21:00 - [280]
 

Edited by: Omal Oma on 18/08/2010 01:21:49
Originally by: Janya Rykayn
I'd just like to point out that the people who are shouting about this are the ones who are having thousand-ship fleet battles.



I didn't read past this part...


The following aren't tears... These are observations and they don't reflect my alliance or corporation's views. It's just how I see things. I'm fine with current game mechanics and my alliance loves working against the odds of my following observations...

Please feel free to dispute what I say.


Two weeks ago we had 600 in system. To date, that's the largest encounter I've seen in Pure Blind region.

The game was unplayable. The system wouldn't load and both sides complained. Our side fielded far more pilots while the opposing side fielded capitals and super capitals. We could get numbers, they could get really big ships.

Now... Since that encounter, I've been in multiple fleets. Sizes range from the small gang... 20-40... through the mid sized gangs, 51-200...

Today, we were in a 40 man fleet. We were going to setup to engage a 40 man hostile fleet.

It was taking up to 3 minutes to jump through a gate. When we did get through, half the fleet would desync or safety warp. When the grid would load... or not in some occasions... we'd find that half the people who were in local with us, were not showing. 20 people would be on the gate aligning and in fleet, but only 8 people in local.

We finally made our way to a station system. We logged out in order to wait on the possibility that the server would correct itself. We had the people of the fleet create petitions.

We were told to clear our cache and that there was a fleet encounter happening in the area that the devs couldn't interfere with.... we were the fleet...

80 people...

This isn't the first time a story like this can be told. It's often that you can't get through gates.

We'll take upwards of an hour to go 10 jumps to respond to a small gang harassing our members and they'll be gone by the time we get there due to traffic control.

The "lag" has nothing to do with "blobbing".

The game in it's current state is just plain broken.


I'm a new player to EVE when considering all the "Bittervets" who have already quit. Many of the things I hear from the vets I'm beginning to experience.

My view on what is killing alliances right now is:

1. Lag... Not the blob lag. The server response lag and desync lag that happens on a daily basis with small gangs. It's frustrating to lose fleets or members one at a time as your ships cannot jump through a gate. It's more frustrating to not be able to respond to friendly requests for help when you're stopped by traffic control. This demoralizes FC's.. You can hear it in their voice. It kills fleets... people will desync and just not bother to come back.

FC's who are decent don't want to lead with this any longer.

2. Poor security mechanics in the game where ships get bumped out of POS's, items stolen... the list goes on. A lot of people will say "so don't give people access"... well, it's kinda hard to be 1 person to run an entire alliance. You need to do this to an extent. There's zero logging of assets being moved/removed/added etc. We're supposed to be in the future man... POS's take 5-8 hours to setup?

Leaders don't have time to participate in alliance fleets and activities.



Garia666
Amarr
T.H.U.G L.I.F.E
Xenon-Empire
Posted - 2010.08.18 12:17:00 - [281]
 

yeah we have heard it all before many times.. fix it already.

There always seem to be more lagg not less of it..

Rick LionHeart
Posted - 2010.08.18 13:58:00 - [282]
 

I would like to say that I really enjoyed playing eve, I've played it since 2006. But the last year has made this game very unplayable for me.

I've been an FC and a grunt in many a battle and the lag has been well lets say unplayable. Jumping through gates has become worse and now you have massive Mexician Standoffs because people know that if they jump through the gate the other side will have a turkey shoot.

I've stopped playing eve, I've just found it no longer fun because of the sov machanics, lag and blackscreens of death etc. I will pay for my accounts with isk until it runs out. But until I see a plausible fix by CCP and I really hope they do fix it cause I love eve because it was and should be player driven, I will not log on except for skill changes. Sad

Rabid Gerbil
Posted - 2010.08.24 15:05:00 - [283]
 

Originally by: CCP Oveur
Originally by: Bajsek
Then it must be a very strange coincidence that this blog followed right after people started to ***** about EvE on internetz. And we thought those two things are somehow connected... silly me. Confused

So.. 18 months? Rolling Eyes


The summer expansion is planned in January and will follow the same pattern. Improvements, fixes, content and new features with 20% spent on fixing stuff.


How about you guys actually listen, almost every time you add something you screw something else up, how about you forego any new content and spent 100% of the effort in fixing the crap you screwed up in earlier expansions. So many things are just not working right or are incomplete.

Defped
Posted - 2010.08.24 20:53:00 - [284]
 

Edited by: Defped on 24/08/2010 20:56:52
Originally by: Doof Hardcastle
so it took you 8 months and another large expansion and dozens of threadnaughts to realize that holy **** we might have actually made stuff worse? Oh wait, no it was just the public relations fiasco because people outside of eve finally heard about how **** you are. That was what elicited response in under a week.

WOW FINALLY ANOTHER ONE HAS AWAKEN FROM THE MATRIX OF EVE-ONLINE SLAVERY !! SO FIX LAG IS CCP'S GOAL ?? NO WAY THEIR SWISS BANK ACCOUNT FORBIDS !! THE EXPANSIONS IS TO CAST THE WIDEST NET OUT THERE TO LURE MAXIMUM GULLIBLE INNOCENT PLAYERS IN, AND THE LAG IS THE SLAUGHTER HOUSE, THE BLOG IS AS YOU POINTED OUT NEVER MORE ACCURATELY IS GOD-DAMNED PUBLIC RELATIONS FIASCO. ALL IN ALL REMEMBER THIS EQUATION N BURN IT INTO YOUR SOUL >>>>>>

MORE LAG = MORE CASUALTIES = MORE GTCS = $$$$$ . LAG IS CCP'S GOLD

FIX LAG WILL NEVER BE ITS GOAL. NEVER HAS BEEN, I REPEAT, NEVER W I L L I T B E. EVEN IF A BRILLIANT BUT POOR DEV COMES UP WITH A GLIMMER HOPE, HIS SOLUTION WILL SURRENDER TO PRE-PROGRAMMED BANDWIDTH SQUEEZE / BOTTLENECK AT THE MOST CRUCIAL TIMES TO MAKE SURE THE MOST DRAMATIC UPSET ENSUES...

HOW ABOUT MORE STUNNING EXPANSIONS ? OOH YOU CAN BET YOUR COLLECTIVE CLONES THEY WILL BE ROLLING OUT ON TIME REGULARLY LIKE A WHISTLE TO MAKE SURE THAT Y O U N E V E R FRAKKING W A K E U P.

NEED WE SAY MORE CCP ?, REMEMBER, YOUR COUNTRY WENT BANKRUPT ONCE, IT CAN HAPPEN AGAIN, SO COULD ANYONE...



Nathan Jameson
Talocan Vanguard
Talocan United
Posted - 2010.08.25 13:13:00 - [285]
 

I for one am very glad to see CCP taking the time to communicate with us about what they're doing. It's nice to see them taking the time to keep the player base informed that yes, they are actually working on it.

Zardock
Reikoku
Cascade Imminent
Posted - 2010.08.25 15:56:00 - [286]
 

Well I've been playing this since 2003, and there's a few things I can say with a fair amount of certainty:
-Lag is getting worse over time, not better.
-Content and fixes coming with these so called "Expansions" are rather more comparable to "Booster Pack" or maybe even "Content Patch" as far as the actual additions go.
-Fleet fights, blob warfare, getting rid of downtimes are issues CCP stipulated they wanted to do away with, but with content patches have actually cemented them deeper into the game mechanics.

CCP, here's a little history lesson:
It begins in 2001, this little company barely known publishes an MMO. The name of the company is Funcom, and the MMO is Anarchy Online.
For a while there things were touch and go, subscription base went up and down and the Funcom crew rushed to fix major release issues and put out some new content to keep things interesting for the playerbase.
This was 2001 for Anarchy Online, and 2003 for EVE.
As AO progressed Funcom eventually sat on their roses, cash and playerbase by devoting most of their resources to another game.

Sound familiar?

Yes. It should! CCP did in fact pull away a lot of resources from EVE to make other games or EVE expansions that we've been waiting for since the EVE stone age, literally.

So who cares?

Well, this is where this story about Funcom really becomes interesting.
You see, their income came mostly from their established MMO, they had a solid fanbase, many subs coming in, things were great for Funcom.
But, when they let their main bread & butter game sit for a while their players started leaving, causing Funcom to cut in the expenses relating to this cash cow game, such as development.
Players left as old issues remained and nothing new was coming out, while a pletora of new promising MMOs were coming. So began the vicious cycle, and now I'd be surprised if AO had more than 10k subscriptions.


tl;dr Other MMO makers have made the same mistake CCP is making now by letting EVE sit like they have and it cost them dearly.
It makes sense to develop new games and publishing them, but when doing so at the expense of your bread & butter game, that's just silly.
CCP may well be in a few years the new Funcom, dead dog that used to be in the A league but now... Not so much!

Jed Clampett
Posted - 2010.08.25 21:00:00 - [287]
 

Edited by: Jed Clampett on 25/08/2010 21:19:00
Edited by: Jed Clampett on 25/08/2010 21:01:22
In the end as long as it does not get too extreme


lag is acceptable IF -- everyone slows down equally, smoothly and in synchronization without rubberbanding (no jerky or confusing "take backs on past actions"). This particularly true for supermassive combat - where it can actual give you time to appreciate and react to the complex situation.


The worst problems with lab and compensating technology are on individual 1 on 1 or very small team battles. For example, right now autotargeting modules have become "instant lock" and allow shooting incoming ships the instant they leave warp...or in some cases before they leave warp. Sure level 5 skills in a BC is a fairly quick lock on. But right now you can have a new warp target selected and your mouse pointer over the warp to 0 button and never get the most agile frigate to start the new warp command before being blasted away by someone already in a low sec belt (two volleys).

Not sure but my observation seem to point to any attempt to lock a target invoking an EVE server side lag compensation routine that restarts "victim" ship warp commands every time a new lock is attempted. I suspect the theory is that "any overlap in time at location X is potential lock on" but that potential lock on is tested without any credit for prior time spend moving toward warp -- probably because its impractical to rubberband a target ship back to location X once they enter warp state. So very agile ships seem to get temporarily warp scrambled by successive lock on attempts bragging out their normal 3-5 seconds to warp to 15-20 seconds to warp. The end effect being a ship that normally could warp away from trouble hangs around until locked & legally warp scrambled or blown away.

Most people would prefer you freeze the victim ship at the instant of actual warp and use that real time stamp in comparisons against any pending "lock on complete" timestamps. Only warp jamming coming into effect before that instant should stop the jump to warp -- although any direct weapons fire damage should be applied. Missile fire could be given a quick straight time of flight check to see if it can possibly arrive before jump to warp. (Yeah I remember the days where simply firing missiles before jump would let them track you through warp to hit you just before docking).


Pages: first : previous : ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10]

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