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


 
Pages: first : previous : 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (11)

Author Topic

Trebor Daehdoow
Gallente
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.04.22 15:00:00 - [61]
 

Originally by: Nouhou Malio
This is the most interesting aspect of this idea technically. As far as I know, a player can't currently know what other nodes reside on the same server as the node he's on right now. Assuming those nodes don't change all that much (say, Youl, Pashanai, and Tar are on the same machine for months), you could conceivably use time dilation to snoop those associations. This makes me uneasy for some reason I can't articulate right now.

This brings up an interesting implementation point -- Veritas, if a node that runs multiple systems gets overloaded, will you TD all of the systems, just the ones causing the overload, or some combination that attempts to minimize the impact on lightly-loaded systems?

Related question: do nearby systems tend to be on the same node?

aKille's 10Don
Posted - 2011.04.22 15:01:00 - [62]
 

Honestly, I'm still confused on why there is so much time being placed upon this?

Last I heard only 11% of the player base was in Null. I've heard the argument that Null helps push the Empire economy but if battles take 10x longer due to time dilation wont that just stagnate the entire economy?

Wouldn't fixing Faction Warfare or increasing Incursion attendance be more appropriate to improving the economy before we go and stagnate it with something like time dilation?

Fuujin
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.22 15:08:00 - [63]
 

Originally by: aKille's 10Don
Honestly, I'm still confused on why there is so much time being placed upon this?

Last I heard only 11% of the player base was in Null. I've heard the argument that Null helps push the Empire economy but if battles take 10x longer due to time dilation wont that just stagnate the entire economy?

Wouldn't fixing Faction Warfare or increasing Incursion attendance be more appropriate to improving the economy before we go and stagnate it with something like time dilation?


Two words for you: Mission Hubs

Blazde
4S Corporation
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2011.04.22 15:08:00 - [64]
 

When this is done can you please also dilate real-life time and implement this 5 years ago Razz

Big thumbs-up

Mashie Saldana
Minmatar
Veto Corp
Posted - 2011.04.22 15:09:00 - [65]
 

Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
Originally by: Nouhou Malio
This is the most interesting aspect of this idea technically. As far as I know, a player can't currently know what other nodes reside on the same server as the node he's on right now. Assuming those nodes don't change all that much (say, Youl, Pashanai, and Tar are on the same machine for months), you could conceivably use time dilation to snoop those associations. This makes me uneasy for some reason I can't articulate right now.

This brings up an interesting implementation point -- Veritas, if a node that runs multiple systems gets overloaded, will you TD all of the systems, just the ones causing the overload, or some combination that attempts to minimize the impact on lightly-loaded systems?

Answered on page 1.

aKille's 10Don
Posted - 2011.04.22 15:10:00 - [66]
 

Originally by: Fuujin
Originally by: aKille's 10Don
Honestly, I'm still confused on why there is so much time being placed upon this?

[...]

Wouldn't fixing Faction Warfare or increasing Incursion attendance be more appropriate to improving the economy before we go and stagnate it with something like time dilation?


Two words for you: Mission Hubs



Well, Mission Hubs went the way of the Dodo bird when they created Variable Agent Ratings.

Jenna Alduin
Posted - 2011.04.22 15:19:00 - [67]
 

Edited by: Jenna Alduin on 22/04/2011 15:21:05
Originally by: aKille's 10Don
Honestly, I'm still confused on why there is so much time being placed upon this?

Last I heard only 11% of the player base was in Null. I've heard the argument that Null helps push the Empire economy but if battles take 10x longer due to time dilation wont that just stagnate the entire economy?

Wouldn't fixing Faction Warfare or increasing Incursion attendance be more appropriate to improving the economy before we go and stagnate it with something like time dilation?

This is Team Gridlock, they fix lag. Team Gridlock does not do game design nor work on PvE features. This is the next thing on their list they're doing to fix lag, because fixing lag is what Team Gridlock does.

I like the idea that whatever CCP blogs about or focuses on, someone says to do something else.

"Here's CQ or BFF fixes" - "LOL Fix Lag first!"

"Here's us working on fixing lag" - "LOL Fix FW or PvE first!"

Also, for what it's worth, I have never set foot in Null Sec but I am very keen to see Time Dilation be introduced. Any increase in effective fleet fights means more stuff gets blown up, more players join Eve to get involved in them, and more players keep on playing Eve and buying stuff. This all helps the economy, not stagnates it.

As has been very well argued elsewhere previously, fleet fights are the poster boy of Eve, one of it's best marketing tools and player attractions. It being in a poor state is bad for the growth of Eve, for all players.

Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises
Posted - 2011.04.22 15:20:00 - [68]
 

Edited by: Bagehi on 22/04/2011 15:31:45
Looking forward to this a lot!

Originally by: aKille's 10Don
Honestly, I'm still confused on why there is so much time being placed upon this?

Last I heard only 11% of the player base was in Null. I've heard the argument that Null helps push the Empire economy but if battles take 10x longer due to time dilation wont that just stagnate the entire economy?

Wouldn't fixing Faction Warfare or increasing Incursion attendance be more appropriate to improving the economy before we go and stagnate it with something like time dilation?


Sure, though the characters out in null account for only about 10% we tend to also have a ton of alts. Alts that are often in high sec. I have three characters in null and eight in high sec. My high sec characters outnumber my null sec characters. This division for null sec players is probably about average. Assuming I am the average null sec player, we account for about 40% of the characters in the game.

However, I am far more concerned with null sec working properly than anything else in this game. Basically, what I'm saying is that the character location count only tells a half truth.

Aineko Macx
Posted - 2011.04.22 15:25:00 - [69]
 

I never understood why you held onto the principle of requiring Destiny run at wallclock time, forcing uneven CPU allocation and creating problems once Destiny took up most of the computing resources. I'm guessing the issue is cooperative multitasking and Destiny code that just reads out the current timestamp to decide it should run instead of being called by an external instance deciding when the simulation should advance one tick. Ofc, using a preemptive multitasking model would make things much easier now, as it would inherently allow TD.

The simulation engine running on the client will obviously have to be made TD factor aware, otherwise you'd have rubberbanding at each server update.

Originally by: Bienator II
good work guys, but i am a bit disappointed about the multi threading statement. I suppose the cluster is all built for single thread throughput hardware wise, thats why no high gains are expected.

That's not it. Read up on Python and the GIL.
At fanfest I was talking with CCP Warlock about this, she's digging deep into the (Stackless) Python implementation, looking for a general solution to this. From what I understood, atm it's not even clear a doable solution is possible. But I wish her best of luck!

aKille's 10Don
Posted - 2011.04.22 15:26:00 - [70]
 

Originally by: Jenna Alduin


Also, for what it's worth, I have never set foot in Null Sec but I am very keen to see Time Dilation be introduced. Any increase in effective fleet fights means more stuff gets blow up, more players join Eve to get involved in them, and more players keep on playing Eve and buying stuff. This all helps the economy, not stagnates it.


If it takes longer to blow up that ship it takes longer to need replacements. Which means it takes longer to sell the ship that is manufactured. Team Gridlock may be in charge of fixing lag but their changes need to be balanced with the rest of the game.

Originally by: Jenna Alduin


As has been very well arguied previously, fllet fights are the poster boy of Eve, one of it's best marketing tools and player attractions. It being in a poor state is bad for the growth of Eve, for all players.



If fleet fights are the poster child for Eve why is it that only 11%(could be higher but not more than 20%) of the player base is in Null-sec? It may be that large fleet fights bring more news to sites like Massively but how does that make it the poster child?

BlankStare
Posted - 2011.04.22 15:35:00 - [71]
 

Quote:
If fleet fights are the poster child for Eve why is it that only 11%(could be higher but not more than 20%) of the player base is in Null-sec? It may be that large fleet fights bring more news to sites like Massively but how does that make it the poster child?


You answered your own question.

Big fleet fights get wide media coverage, which exposes more people to EVE, which means more people try it out. They may come because they see news about a massive fleet fight, but they stay or go depending on a lot of other things and may never see a big fleet engagement.

Making fleet fights fairer and less likely to crap the server out is one small part of the journey to making EVE better, and there are many other things that need doing, I agree. but this does not mean that those other things should be given any higher priority.

The eyes of the wider media are on fleet fights, CCP don't get to decide that, but they should capitalise on it nonetheless. It would make no sense not to.

Silk75
Bad Kitty Inc.
Wildly Inappropriate.
Posted - 2011.04.22 15:38:00 - [72]
 

Originally by: aKille's 10Don
If fleet fights are the poster child for Eve why is it that only 11%(could be higher but not more than 20%) of the player base is in Null-sec? It may be that large fleet fights bring more news to sites like Massively but how does that make it the poster child?


Single sharded combat is the USP (Unique selling point) for EVE from CCP's point of view, why not sell the epitome of that experience? Selling and showing groups performing level 4 missions doesn't really cut it from a marketing perspective.

Also great blog from Veritas, his suggestion got a room of cynical 0.0ers at Fanfest to sit up and virtually applaud in the Large Scale Warfare session we were in, plus the man can sink Brennivin like no other person I've seen before, so we are in safe hands!

Steve Thomas
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2011.04.22 15:41:00 - [73]
 

Originally by: Brannor McThife
I don't like how multi-threading was "fobbed off" like this. Working in multi-threaded environments on various platforms on various App Servers has shown that multi-threading in high-load environments is the #1 solution. I know it is probably not the easiest thing to do and the EvE engine is probably architected around this single-threaded model, but please don't go saying that it wouldn't buy you much.

-G
ok first off here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amdahl%27s_law

the TLDR version of that is the current game combat engine is not realy that divisable right now. In fact a lot of ongoing mmos still use single thead with there combat systems. WoW only recently went multi thread with there system and that was part of the whole cataclysm package, RIFTS, DCOL is multi threaded because they were built that way from the ground up.

Nirnaeth Ornoediad
Caldari
Clan Shadow Wolf
Fatal Ascension
Posted - 2011.04.22 15:47:00 - [74]
 

+1 vote for this feature. I'd rather have this than Captain's Quarters (though I think it's a different dev team).

aKille's 10Don
Posted - 2011.04.22 15:50:00 - [75]
 

Originally by: BlankStare

You answered your own question.

Big fleet fights get wide media coverage, which exposes more people to EVE, which means more people try it out. They may come because they see news about a massive fleet fight, but they stay or go depending on a lot of other things and may never see a big fleet engagement.

Making fleet fights fairer and less likely to crap the server out is one small part of the journey to making EVE better, and there are many other things that need doing, I agree. but this does not mean that those other things should be given any higher priority.

The eyes of the wider media are on fleet fights, CCP don't get to decide that, but they should capitalise on it nonetheless. It would make no sense not to.


You are assuming that the articles that Massively or Ten Ton Hammer are read by players outside of Eve. I know plenty of other MMO players that don't bother reading the articles because large fleet fights are not what they are looking for.

Elsa Nietchize
Posted - 2011.04.22 15:51:00 - [76]
 

I'm glad to see CCP is moving forward on this. The reality is that there will be unforeseen consequences, but I do not believe that should hold up the development and deployment of this feature. With sufficient 'mass testing', we should be able to uncover the most glaring issues. CCP has also moved to phased roll-outs on TQ. It would be interesting to see how this works when it's implemented in a hisec system undergoing load due to an Incursion.

One thing we have to keep in mind is that the TD looks to be a dynamic feature used 'as needed'. Rarely should we run into a case where we should see heavy TD over an extended period of time. As Veritas stated, the intention is that players will be able to play the game and make tactical moves that will impact the severity of TD. Even after an hour of moderate to significant TD, the shape of the battle field should change sufficiently enough to reduce the overall need for TD.

The implementation of this will of course cause whines and moans but the draw-backs must be objectively compared to the alternative. I'd rather lose my ship in a delayed battle and be able to get back to playing my game than lose my ship to a black screen and not be able to log back in until after the next down-time.

Also, future enhancements to the game such as multi-threading will reduce the need for TD. This solution both provides a 'fix' for our current situation and scales back accordingly as the game changes.

Erichk Knaar
Caldari
Noir.
Noir. Mercenary Group
Posted - 2011.04.22 16:01:00 - [77]
 

Originally by: Xaarous
Originally by: Rainus Max
Sounds like decent fix for the mechanics of lag.

The question I've got to ask is, how is this going to fix the main problem of player boredom waiting for things to happen? It's all well and good being able to actually target the next primary but if I can go of and build a life size replica of the Eiffel tower out of matchsticks in that time its not really fixing/working around the problem.


Things happening slowly and predictably beats the pants off of things happening chaotically or not at all. If you're saying that "running at 10% for an extended period is le suck", you're right. The big question is whether this mechanic really allows the current big fights to run MOST of the time at at least 33% (arbitrary value, but 1/3rd of real-time is still pretty good for all but torps and arty :p).


Reading between the lines, and based on some of the stuff Veritas said at his Fanfest presentation, the biggest issues are when massive state changes happen. Jump ins, mass drone deploys, big cyno in, etc. Currently, this just shoves (thousands, tens of thousands) tasks into the queue, and the server flips out trying to manage and sync the state changes and weird crap happens. Eventually, the server catches up and things normalize (somewhat).

I'm guessing that an implementation of time dilation will end up looking something like:

Big jump in (800v800) => time slows down to 20% Everyone waits while everything loads, launches drones, activates hardners, etc. As the server gets everything synced, and updates all the state under td, it will speed up over a period of time to say, 80% which allows it to run the 1600 fight at "normal" speed. The amount of TD should roughly follow the shape of the graph Veritas showed in his FF presentation, so no, there probably won't be a 3 hour fight at a fixed 33% time. Its only really needed for the big state changes.

Lynn Deniera
Caldari
The Foreign Legion
The Remnant Legion
Posted - 2011.04.22 16:01:00 - [78]
 

Originally by: aKille's 10Don
Honestly, I'm still confused on why there is so much time being placed upon this?

Last I heard only 11% of the player base was in Null. I've heard the argument that Null helps push the Empire economy but if battles take 10x longer due to time dilation wont that just stagnate the entire economy?

Wouldn't fixing Faction Warfare or increasing Incursion attendance be more appropriate to improving the economy before we go and stagnate it with something like time dilation?


You look like troll bait - heres a link for you incase you're just stupid - http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/QEN/QEN_Q4-2010.pdf

Bienator II
Posted - 2011.04.22 16:06:00 - [79]
 

Edited by: Bienator II on 22/04/2011 16:07:29
Originally by: Aineko Macx

Originally by: Bienator II
good work guys, but i am a bit disappointed about the multi threading statement. I suppose the cluster is all built for single thread throughput hardware wise, thats why no high gains are expected.

That's not it. Read up on Python and the GIL.
At fanfest I was talking with CCP Warlock about this, she's digging deep into the (Stackless) Python implementation, looking for a general solution to this. From what I understood, atm it's not even clear a doable solution is possible. But I wish her best of luck!


thanks, this explains a lot. Eve is now running into the limitations of stackless python. I don't think the tasklets and the build-in scheduler where designed to scale well in server environments in the first place. It looks very similar to actor/message passing frameworks but it seems to emulate concurrency in a single thread (which is very unusual).

aKille's 10Don
Posted - 2011.04.22 16:12:00 - [80]
 

Edited by: aKille''s 10Don on 22/04/2011 16:12:48
Originally by: Lynn Deniera
Originally by: aKille's 10Don
Honestly, I'm still confused on why there is so much time being placed upon this?

Last I heard only 11% of the player base was in Null. I've heard the argument that Null helps push the Empire economy but if battles take 10x longer due to time dilation wont that just stagnate the entire economy?

Wouldn't fixing Faction Warfare or increasing Incursion attendance be more appropriate to improving the economy before we go and stagnate it with something like time dilation?



You look like troll bait - heres a link for you incase you're just stupid - http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/QEN/QEN_Q4-2010.pdf



Thanks for giving everyone the info. I'm 100% correct in the fact that only 11% of the player base is in Nullsec. (See Page 10 of QEN)

Ranger 1
Amarr
Ranger Corp
Posted - 2011.04.22 16:14:00 - [81]
 

Edited by: Ranger 1 on 22/04/2011 16:19:50
People seem to think that TD will make battles last longer. In fact, compared to the status quo, TD affected battles will actually proceed faster as the game won't hang/black screen. Also players will be more entertained by a battle that moves in slow motion as opposed to a game that stops entirely or goes black.

A couple of pertinent questions:

1: How is speed affected by TD?
Will the ship slow down proportionately, thus becoming easier to track?

Or will a ship maintain normal speed and simply be trickier to control due to the delay in the pilots commands being reflected in the ships movement?

2: Under the current missile mechanics, how will this affect a Missiles flight time?

Could this possibly have the unforseen benefit of actually making missiles more viable in comparison to turret ships in long range combat as the delay in applying damage to target due to flight time may be altered?

3: I know that a delay requiring cynos to "spool up" before allowing the actual jump has been considered. Will TD solve this issue by it's very mechanics, or make their implementation mandatory due to TD often not starting until AFTER the initial jump in of caps?

If TD affects the cyno ship and it's cyno, is it preferable for the waiting fleet to have to wait longer to jump in? (I personally think so)

4: Will the ability to jump out of a TD system and recharge shields/repair more quickly than they could if they stayed in the TD system considered a problem, or as an encouragement for fleets to split up and spread out on both sides of the engagment?

If it is considered a problem, will the TD affect be incrementally implemented in surrounding systems?


I'm sure a multitude of issues will be resolved simply because everyone in system will be affected equally, it's the issues that affect events in other connected (via gate or jump bridge) that will be the most tricky.

ShipSpinner
Posted - 2011.04.22 16:18:00 - [82]
 

How will capitals jumping out of a system work?

Example: My capital/supercap/whatever is in system X functioning at, say, 10% speed. I'm trying to GTFO. My buddy/alt/new best friend lights a cyno in system Y, which is dead empty and running at 100%. His cyno cycle time is normal, no matter how cynos are affected inside the dialation. I issue the jump command.

If, due to time dialation, the jump command take longer to come up than his cyno field will last, what happens? does the jump fail, trapping me and wasting liquid ozone? If it succeeds, can my buddy let the cyno drop and gtfo to the next system on my jump route before I emerge from jump? Probably the worst option is that caps jumping out should get priority and ignore time dialation, for obvious reasons.

Time dialation itself sounds like a very good idea, but there's a lot that has to be considered in how a dialated system will work with the rest of the game.

Also, I don't envy you guys wading that deep in to the fundamental code that powers EVE. I don't expect we'll see any of this even in testing for at least a year even if you guys work on nothing else. Good luck, Gridlock.

Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises
Posted - 2011.04.22 16:22:00 - [83]
 

Originally by: aKille's 10Don
Thanks for giving everyone the info. I'm 100% correct in the fact that only 11% of the player base is in Nullsec. (See Page 10 of QEN)

And I'm 100% confident that null sec players have at least as many, if not more alts in high sec. We do that kinda thing cause we have to based on the current mechanics of the game. If you read up to my previous post, you will see that I hypothesize that roughly 40% of the characters in the game are controlled by null sec players. Rough guess.

Dwindlehop
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
Posted - 2011.04.22 16:22:00 - [84]
 

Would Sunday afternoon in Jita be subject to time dilation? Or is it only certain kinds of server load that will trigger the dilation?

Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises
Posted - 2011.04.22 16:28:00 - [85]
 

Originally by: ShipSpinner
How will capitals jumping out of a system work?

Example: My capital/supercap/whatever is in system X functioning at, say, 10% speed. I'm trying to GTFO. My buddy/alt/new best friend lights a cyno in system Y, which is dead empty and running at 100%. His cyno cycle time is normal, no matter how cynos are affected inside the dialation. I issue the jump command.

If, due to time dialation, the jump command take longer to come up than his cyno field will last, what happens? does the jump fail, trapping me and wasting liquid ozone? If it succeeds, can my buddy let the cyno drop and gtfo to the next system on my jump route before I emerge from jump? Probably the worst option is that caps jumping out should get priority and ignore time dialation, for obvious reasons.

Time dialation itself sounds like a very good idea, but there's a lot that has to be considered in how a dialated system will work with the rest of the game.

Also, I don't envy you guys wading that deep in to the fundamental code that powers EVE. I don't expect we'll see any of this even in testing for at least a year even if you guys work on nothing else. Good luck, Gridlock.

This is a really good question. Another one is the waiting on the gate to come in. Those timers can have you sitting vulnerable on an entrance gate for 5-10 minutes already. I worry a little about what will happen with time dilation. Perhaps it is time to change the jump mechanic so it isn't one node handing players off to the next node. Once they hit jump, that ship shouldn't be sitting there, just like that ship shouldn't be sitting on the other side waiting for the server-client communication to resolve. Taking care of those problems would likely reduce a fair amount of animosity from players towards customer support.

The Mittani
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.22 16:48:00 - [86]
 

I just want to thank Veritas to responding to our calls for more information so quickly and thoroughly. That's an awful lot of whizgigs and beepboops and tasklets and I don't even know.

I learned more about how lag works in that one blog than I have in years of playing this game, heh.

ShipSpinner
Posted - 2011.04.22 16:50:00 - [87]
 

Originally by: Bagehi
Originally by: ShipSpinner
How will capitals jumping out of a system work?

Example: My capital/supercap/whatever is in system X functioning at, say, 10% speed. I'm trying to GTFO. My buddy/alt/new best friend lights a cyno in system Y, which is dead empty and running at 100%. His cyno cycle time is normal, no matter how cynos are affected inside the dialation. I issue the jump command.

If, due to time dialation, the jump command take longer to come up than his cyno field will last, what happens? does the jump fail, trapping me and wasting liquid ozone? If it succeeds, can my buddy let the cyno drop and gtfo to the next system on my jump route before I emerge from jump? Probably the worst option is that caps jumping out should get priority and ignore time dialation, for obvious reasons.

Time dialation itself sounds like a very good idea, but there's a lot that has to be considered in how a dialated system will work with the rest of the game.

Also, I don't envy you guys wading that deep in to the fundamental code that powers EVE. I don't expect we'll see any of this even in testing for at least a year even if you guys work on nothing else. Good luck, Gridlock.

This is a really good question. Another one is the waiting on the gate to come in. Those timers can have you sitting vulnerable on an entrance gate for 5-10 minutes already. I worry a little about what will happen with time dilation. Perhaps it is time to change the jump mechanic so it isn't one node handing players off to the next node. Once they hit jump, that ship shouldn't be sitting there, just like that ship shouldn't be sitting on the other side waiting for the server-client communication to resolve. Taking care of those problems would likely reduce a fair amount of animosity from players towards customer support.



Some kind of between-systems state could be both good and bad. Good because it gives players somewhere to be without leaving them horribly vulnerable (see: black screen of death, gate timers). Bad because it introduces an area of the game where people are effectively untouchable and incapable of interacting with the universe for an indeterminate period of time, and might introduce all kinds of complications to even routine jumps.

With regard to jumping in to high-load situations, with time dilation you could maybe have the ship jump, the client "pre-load" the system before actually appearing in it, which would hopefully reduce the client-side lag (and give the server more time to send all the information to the client before it really "matters"), and add a more transparent timer that estimates when you will appear on-grid. As long as dilation affects gate-cloak as well, once you make it into a system you should be OK, but I agree that being stuck on the other side of the gate is a major source of rage.

Xaarous
Caldari
Woopatang
Primary.
Posted - 2011.04.22 16:50:00 - [88]
 

Edited by: Xaarous on 22/04/2011 16:52:11
Originally by: Ranger 1
Edited by: Ranger 1 on 22/04/2011 16:19:50
People seem to think that TD will make battles last longer. In fact, compared to the status quo, TD affected battles will actually proceed faster as the game won't hang/black screen. Also players will be more entertained by a battle that moves in slow motion as opposed to a game that stops entirely or goes black.

A couple of pertinent questions:

1: How is speed affected by TD?
Will the ship slow down proportionately, thus becoming easier to track?

Or will a ship maintain normal speed and simply be trickier to control due to the delay in the pilots commands being reflected in the ships movement?

2: Under the current missile mechanics, how will this affect a Missiles flight time?

Could this possibly have the unforseen benefit of actually making missiles more viable in comparison to turret ships in long range combat as the delay in applying damage to target due to flight time may be altered?

3: I know that a delay requiring cynos to "spool up" before allowing the actual jump has been considered. Will TD solve this issue by it's very mechanics, or make their implementation mandatory due to TD often not starting until AFTER the initial jump in of caps?

If TD affects the cyno ship and it's cyno, is it preferable for the waiting fleet to have to wait longer to jump in? (I personally think so)

4: Will the ability to jump out of a TD system and recharge shields/repair more quickly than they could if they stayed in the TD system considered a problem, or as an encouragement for fleets to split up and spread out on both sides of the engagment?

If it is considered a problem, will the TD affect be incrementally implemented in surrounding systems?


I'm sure a multitude of issues will be resolved simply because everyone in system will be affected equally, it's the issues that affect events in other connected (via gate or jump bridge) that will be the most tricky.


Not quite the right way to look at it. In Time Dilation, the definition of a second is what's changing. So you perceive a ship going 500 m/s as going some % slower; but a gun that tracks at .015 rad/sec *also* slows by the same %. Net result, no change to accuracy/tracking issues. Same for missiles - the explosion propagates at the same % slower as the ship's perceived velocity changes.

If the TD rate is changing from second to second, I could see manual ship control being tricky, but I doubt this will become a huge problem (it affects both sides equally, inty pilots of all alignments will have to adapt and they like that kinda thing anyway).

The rep-outside-TD area and jump to full-speed cyno seem to be the most interesting edge cases so far. It'll be VERY interesting to see if the prospect of getting out of TD changes fleet tactics (and if so, is it for the better). In theory it'll be self-correcting: As TD worsens, the engagement will "break up"; as that happens and the load spreads to multiple nodes, TD goes away, fleets blob up again, rinse and repeat. What's key there is that fun stuff is happening the whole time, just sometimes in slow motion.

As someone else said, that sounds a lot better than an indefinite black-screen...

(Edited for emphasis and formatting only)

Kyoko Sakoda
Caldari
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2011.04.22 16:52:00 - [89]
 

I'd like to second the idea of getting a server notification on dilation factor as a UI element. Make it one line of text with a clock icon, and put it somewhere inconspicuous like around the session change timer or what not, but it needs to be there.

Vincent Athena
Posted - 2011.04.22 16:58:00 - [90]
 

Few comments based on my understanding :

For those saying TD can be exploited to bring in reinforcements, or make saving or killing a POS easier: That can and does already happen. Remember we got a broken form of TD right now known as Lag. By implementing TD the exploit possibilities really do not change, things just become fair as TD will effect everyone on node, not be chaotic like now.

About tracking, ship speed, explosions: The numerical values (m/sec, rad/sec) all stay the same, its just one sec of server time will take more than one real second. Result: the chances to hit will remain the same. Missiles will take longer to get to target, speed tanking explosions has the same effect.

About mods with long cycles: a module that takes say 15 seconds to cycle really takes 15 server ticks to cycle. That will remain the same, but each server tick can have a different real time duration.


Pages: first : previous : 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : 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