open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: Letter from the CSM
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 : last (11)

Author Topic

Rainus Max
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2011.04.12 12:01:00 - [241]
 

Time dialation makes sense to counter the problems but CCP you need to make sure it doesnt extend the lenght of battles.

3/4/5 hr battles are a pain especially if you work or have school etc, if all you do is double the times your still *in theory* risking increasing battle lengths to 6-10 hrs and not sure about most people but I know even on a weekend when I have nothing else to do I'm slightly against devoting the entire day to fighting.

Id suggest increasing damage output of guns etc to counter the increase in wait. IE double the cycle time, double the damage per shot.

My suggestion but im not a game developer (or a massive PvPer TBH), so its probably full of carp.

Razzor Death
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.12 12:07:00 - [242]
 

That is a very interesting thought tbh, double the cycle times but double the damage.


Abdiel Kavash
Caldari
Paladin Order
Fidelas Constans
Posted - 2011.04.12 12:20:00 - [243]
 

CSM 6 best CSM?

Lord Zim
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.12 12:34:00 - [244]
 

Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
In the long term, the only solution is game-mechanics tweaks that naturally limit engagement sizes to those the servers can reasonably handle at reasonable τ. Time Dilation is one of several tweaks that buys the time to find that solution.

As long as the tweaks encourage (something like multiple sov objectives or whatever) and not force these limits, that's fine. If you try to force limits in anything that's PVP related, you'll get a big fat "no" from me. You can limit in PVE all you want and I won't give a flying ****, but stay away from PVP content with hard limits.

Camios
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2011.04.12 12:35:00 - [245]
 

Originally by: Razzor Death
That is a very interesting thought tbh, double the cycle times but double the damage.



And keep using maelstroms for 25k alpha strikes, and thrash logistics.

EnderCapitalG
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.12 12:37:00 - [246]
 

Originally by: Camios
Originally by: Razzor Death
That is a very interesting thought tbh, double the cycle times but double the damage.



And keep using maelstroms for 25k alpha strikes, and thrash logistics.


How dare we use game mechanics to win fights.

Razzor Death
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.12 12:46:00 - [247]
 

Originally by: Camios
Originally by: Razzor Death
That is a very interesting thought tbh, double the cycle times but double the damage.



And keep using maelstroms for 25k alpha strikes, and thrash logistics.


Don't worry our t1 gunned maelstroms have no problem thrashing logistics as it is.


Trebor Daehdoow
Gallente
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.04.12 12:56:00 - [248]
 

Originally by: Lord Zim
Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
In the long term, the only solution is game-mechanics tweaks that naturally limit engagement sizes to those the servers can reasonably handle at reasonable τ. Time Dilation is one of several tweaks that buys the time to find that solution.

As long as the tweaks encourage (something like multiple sov objectives or whatever) and not force these limits, that's fine.

This has ever been my philosophy, and time dilation has the virtue of permitting those encouragements to be more subtle, because the overall system degrades more gracefully.

Lord Zim
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.12 13:20:00 - [249]
 

Edited by: Lord Zim on 12/04/2011 13:24:28
Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
This has ever been my philosophy, and time dilation has the virtue of permitting those encouragements to be more subtle, because the overall system degrades more gracefully.

I think you'll find that the time dilation won't really make us stop trying to outblob the other guy (take DRF/NC skirmishes as an example), in fact I predict that as long as SOV is the way it is now, time dilation will only exacerbate the problem.

edit: and by "the problem", I mean the problem of bringing more dudes, not lag. So not really a problem, more a feature.

Trebor Daehdoow
Gallente
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.04.12 13:42:00 - [250]
 

Originally by: Lord Zim
Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
This has ever been my philosophy, and time dilation has the virtue of permitting those encouragements to be more subtle, because the overall system degrades more gracefully.

I think you'll find that the time dilation won't really make us stop trying to outblob the other guy (take DRF/NC skirmishes as an example), in fact I predict that as long as SOV is the way it is now, time dilation will only exacerbate the problem.

Which has been my point since my original campaign for CSM5 -- "Fleets expand to fit the lag (or time-dilation) available". Time-dilation, or any technical lag fix, just buys you time to make game design changes that render server-melting blobbing a non-optimal tactic.

What those game design changes are, of course, is an entirely different discussion.

Lord Zim
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.12 13:51:00 - [251]
 

Edited by: Lord Zim on 12/04/2011 14:05:09
Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
What those game design changes are, of course, is an entirely different discussion.

And as long as those design chances aren't of the fog of war type, but are designed to try to encourage people to hit more targets because the front line is more than 1 system wide at any given time, we're on the same page.

Edit: Unless, of course, we're looking at a chokepoint which makes it difficult to sneak around, but I like it when stakes are high occasionally.

Furb Killer
Gallente
Posted - 2011.04.12 14:11:00 - [252]
 

Originally by: Lord Zim
Edited by: Lord Zim on 12/04/2011 14:05:09
Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
What those game design changes are, of course, is an entirely different discussion.

And as long as those design chances aren't of the fog of war type, but are designed to try to encourage people to hit more targets because the front line is more than 1 system wide at any given time, we're on the same page.

Edit: Unless, of course, we're looking at a chokepoint which makes it difficult to sneak around, but I like it when stakes are high occasionally.

Which again is only the case if we are talking about a continious fight, and not based arround some timers. Now timers could have a smaller place, but if you put a bunch of fights at different locations but still at all the same time, the goal is still to bring as many people as possible at a select few timers.

Ratnose Banker
Posted - 2011.04.12 14:55:00 - [253]
 

Edited by: Ratnose Banker on 12/04/2011 14:55:07
Eve will honestly be a lot better with time dilation and all the great changes coming soon like jump bridge nerfs, ability to attack moon miners etc. Can't wait!

Ming ChaChing
Posted - 2011.04.12 15:52:00 - [254]
 

Edited by: Ming ChaChing on 12/04/2011 15:54:07
[removed]

Ming Sying
Amarr
Posted - 2011.04.12 15:55:00 - [255]
 

I hate fleet battles. You spend hours station spinning waiting for a fleet op to start, then you finally jumpbridge into a black screen which you sit at for about 15 minutes before your connection either drops or you reload into a station having died. It also sucks that if you do make it into the star system, your modules don't toggle off, commands don't get sent to the server, and it just becomes a bunch of looping animations until the server craps out 30 minutes later.

If time dilation fixes those issues, eve fleet battles will finally become fun again.

Awesome Tough Guy
Posted - 2011.04.12 18:57:00 - [256]
 

I knew voting for mittens would turn out well Smile

Vincent Athena
Posted - 2011.04.12 19:31:00 - [257]
 

Originally by: Razzor Death
That is a very interesting thought tbh, double the cycle times but double the damage.




I think its double the cycle time and have the same damage per cycle, but also double the cycle time on all forms of repping, including passive regen.

Shaera Taam
Minmatar
Minmatar Death Squad
Broken Chains Alliance
Posted - 2011.04.12 20:18:00 - [258]
 

Originally by: Vincent Athena
Originally by: Razzor Death
That is a very interesting thought tbh, double the cycle times but double the damage.




I think its double the cycle time and have the same damage per cycle, but also double the cycle time on all forms of repping, including passive regen.


i would *hope* that such balancing factors would be implemented... perhaps while time dilates and damage increases to match, passive regen and logi rep effects would also increase so they "look" like they are happening at RT speed?

otherwise large fleet fights would simply turn into wtfbbqpwnfests!Laughing

/me is not a coder or game dev... shrugs at possible fullacrapness...

Rainus Max
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2011.04.12 20:19:00 - [259]
 

Originally by: Vincent Athena
Originally by: Razzor Death
That is a very interesting thought tbh, double the cycle times but double the damage.




I think its double the cycle time and have the same damage per cycle, but also double the cycle time on all forms of repping, including passive regen.


The original idea about doubling the damage was to speed up the battle so that a normal 3hour battle doesn't become a 6hour battle. Simply buffing/nerfing logi's I personally don't think would have a massive effect on battle lengths, but as I stopped partaking of fleet pew shortly after the great lagageddon I have no idea how heavy a role logi's play these days.

Would be interesting to see some shiny graphs on this, feck knows how you go about it though.

Rainus Max
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2011.04.12 20:25:00 - [260]
 

Originally by: Shaera Taam
Originally by: Vincent Athena
Originally by: Razzor Death
That is a very interesting thought tbh, double the cycle times but double the damage.




I think its double the cycle time and have the same damage per cycle, but also double the cycle time on all forms of repping, including passive regen.


i would *hope* that such balancing factors would be implemented... perhaps while time dilates and damage increases to match, passive regen and logi rep effects would also increase so they "look" like they are happening at RT speed?

otherwise large fleet fights would simply turn into wtfbbqpwnfests!Laughing

/me is not a coder or game dev... shrugs at possible fullacrapness...


Completely counters the point of speeding up the battle resolution, now you have a 6hr battle at 1/2 speed instead of a 3hr battle.

Shaera Taam
Minmatar
Minmatar Death Squad
Broken Chains Alliance
Posted - 2011.04.12 20:39:00 - [261]
 

Originally by: Rainus Max
Originally by: Shaera Taam
Originally by: Vincent Athena
Originally by: Razzor Death
That is a very interesting thought tbh, double the cycle times but double the damage.




I think its double the cycle time and have the same damage per cycle, but also double the cycle time on all forms of repping, including passive regen.


i would *hope* that such balancing factors would be implemented... perhaps while time dilates and damage increases to match, passive regen and logi rep effects would also increase so they "look" like they are happening at RT speed?

otherwise large fleet fights would simply turn into wtfbbqpwnfests!Laughing

/me is not a coder or game dev... shrugs at possible fullacrapness...


Completely counters the point of speeding up the battle resolution, now you have a 6hr battle at 1/2 speed instead of a 3hr battle.


the idea of time dilation is to make sure everyone-in-fleet's actions are logged and implemented on the server, not speed up battle resolution. that's simply something that would be needed IRL to keep 3hr battles from turning into 6hr battles.

the issues must be handled together, yes, but they're not the same thing.

and it doesnt seem right that time dilation merely means that everyone's ships are suddenly that much less defensible. that's what a dilation damage increase (without defense/rep buff) would mean, right?

/me is not being sarcastic or intentionally-difficult... really wanna know!

Rainus Max
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2011.04.12 21:09:00 - [262]
 

Originally by: Shaera Taam
the idea of time dilation is to make sure everyone-in-fleet's actions are logged and implemented on the server, not speed up battle resolution. that's simply something that would be needed IRL to keep 3hr battles from turning into 6hr battles.

the issues must be handled together, yes, but they're not the same thing.

and it doesnt seem right that time dilation merely means that everyone's ships are suddenly that much less defensible. that's what a dilation damage increase (without defense/rep buff) would mean, right?

/me is not being sarcastic or intentionally-difficult... really wanna know!


Heavily depends on how CCP plan to implement the dilation, I'm assuming that they simply double the cycle timers on things (probably not what CCP will do in the end). With the server 'happy' the problem is you now need to speed the battle up for the player resolving the battle quicker would be a good start point. Doubling the damage output isnt idea but its a fairly good start in my opinion at speeding it up, increasing damage resistance (IE reps etc) in my mind only servers to keep the target alive longer and thus extend the battle.

Lord Zim
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.12 21:42:00 - [263]
 

Edited by: Lord Zim on 12/04/2011 21:42:51
I see absolutely no reason why damage should be doubled if the time dilation halves the speed at which you progress, that would just open up a can of worms wrt balancing again.

I'm assuming that the major thing that'll happen is that ticks in the physics engine are increased in real time length, or something like that.

Ming Sying
Amarr
Posted - 2011.04.12 21:55:00 - [264]
 

Edited by: Ming Sying on 12/04/2011 21:56:10
Originally by: Lord Zim
Edited by: Lord Zim on 12/04/2011 21:42:51
I see absolutely no reason why damage should be doubled if the time dilation halves the speed at which you progress, that would just open up a can of worms wrt balancing again.

I'm assuming that the major thing that'll happen is that ticks in the physics engine are increased in real time length, or something like that.


This is a simple and elegant solution. I'm tired of the theorycrafting. We don't need CCP to break anything else. I'd rather they just implement this and then continue throwing money and hardware at the lag or develop a new game engine.

Spitfork
Posted - 2011.04.12 21:58:00 - [265]
 

Originally by: Rainus Max
Completely counters the point of speeding up the battle resolution, now you have a 6hr battle at 1/2 speed instead of a 3hr battle.

That laggy fleet fight will take the whole 6 hours without TD anyway. Because what should take 3 hours, because of module lag, guns not cycling, whatever slows things down anyway. Haven't you been in a lagfest? I'd bet, that the battle might draw to an end *faster* because the game would (hypothetically) work the way it's meant to. It's easier to kill stuff with half the rof, but knowing, that when you do press f1, the guns WILL fire, instead of jamming, locking, cap never ending and you flying off on mwd in a random direction.

LordElfa
Gallente
Golden Lyon Warriors
Posted - 2011.04.12 22:43:00 - [266]
 

I'm most curious how you will be injected back into regular time. I mean once slowed down, you will soon fall behind the rest of the galaxy, then what? I mean, say for example you ended up 4 hours behind the rest of EVE during a fight, would you just skip forward 4 hours upon leaving the system?

Vincent Athena
Posted - 2011.04.12 23:15:00 - [267]
 

Originally by: LordElfa
I'm most curious how you will be injected back into regular time. I mean once slowed down, you will soon fall behind the rest of the galaxy, then what? I mean, say for example you ended up 4 hours behind the rest of EVE during a fight, would you just skip forward 4 hours upon leaving the system?


I do not think there is anything that needs to be skipped ahead. Your training would still go at normal speed, as would you industry jobs, the timers on market orders, and so on. It would only be flying about shooting stuff that is slowed. As soon as you jump out of the node that is under TD, you start moving and shooting normally again.

Reinforcement timers are an issue. Whats the consensus? Should they be slowed in a system that is under TD? Or run at real time?

Another observation: Right now a 800 ship fight progresses (on a reinforced node) acceptably, say can be completed in an hour. Double it to 1600 and it turns into a 6 hour lag-fest. With TD it would be a 2 to 3 hour slow motion fight. TD might actually speed up fights over what happens now.

Shaera Taam
Minmatar
Minmatar Death Squad
Broken Chains Alliance
Posted - 2011.04.12 23:17:00 - [268]
 

Originally by: LordElfa
I'm most curious how you will be injected back into regular time. I mean once slowed down, you will soon fall behind the rest of the galaxy, then what? I mean, say for example you ended up 4 hours behind the rest of EVE during a fight, would you just skip forward 4 hours upon leaving the system?


pretty much the only way i could see it happening, tbh...

heh, as long as we dont lose 4 hours of skill points Shocked id be okay with it!

Cearain
Caldari
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
Posted - 2011.04.12 23:27:00 - [269]
 

Edited by: Cearain on 13/04/2011 00:51:16
Yes, do away with assembly hall and the views of those idiot players.

Letís just claim credit for a good idea that CCP was already working on before we took office!

CCP will be happy to lie and agree that "time dilation" was developed due to csm6. After all, it's good marketing to pretend you listen to the players. I canít wait to hear the spin about the role csm 6 had in the development of this idea. Perhaps the anticipated dev blog will already have it in there.

Spooks'em
Posted - 2011.04.13 00:06:00 - [270]
 

Originally by: CCP Veritas

I mean, it's not like you're going to be able to toss 3000 people in a system and have things running hunky dorry just because of time dilation. It's going to be slow, but it's also going to be more fair, more predictable, and have the game mechanics intact. I think that's a solid improvement.


Absolutely, it will be great a improvement, which is why I praised it as I did! It is a technical and game mechanics change that helps deal with the reality of the scale demanded by Eve.

Originally by: CCP Veritas

Does it solve lag forever and ever? Nope. Nothing short of putting hard limits on how many players can participate in a fight will. I don't see us doing that any time soon, so the war against lag goes on~


From a strictly technical standpoint, there can never be a true permanent fix to lag short of hard limits as you and others have pointed out. However, I know there are ways of implementing game mechanics to limit the benefits of bringing more people-under certain situations-than the server can handle, and that would be a fix.

Originally by: CCP Veritas

Originally by: Lots of People
Stuff about CSM effectiveness

I can only really speak for myself, but I found some of the CSM5 delegates to be a fantastic resource when it came to finding out how, exactly, lag effects the players. I'm not particularly into the 0.0 game, so that window into the player experience has been of great value to me. It has allowed me to identify problems that didn't appear to be nasty from a purely technical standpoint, but were a major barrier to the player experience. I'm hoping to build upon that relationship with CSM6 - so far so good.

Anyways, I'll cook up a devblog about this all in the near future.



I look forward to it.


Pages: first : previous : ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 : last (11)

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