open All Channels
seplocked Test Server Feedback
blankseplocked PETITION: Reduce fighter spam lag!
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15]

Author Topic

Moon Kitten
GoonWaffe
Posted - 2007.09.22 20:38:00 - [421]
 

Will the next patch improve the lag situation? Does anyone know?

Xune
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2007.09.26 10:44:00 - [422]
 

Edited by: Xune on 26/09/2007 10:53:19
Fighters dont autoatack.
Drones do yes, fighters dont. So the call that figters are immune to lag is utter nonsens. Only time a fighter "atacks" something that hes not told to atack is when its under fire itself.

Keep you hands away from my Fighters and Carrier ! took long enough to get all of the skills to 5

edit: i know most of the goons are to " young" to remember the old times. And many of the others simply seem to have a selective perception. But back then when they changed the max drones on normal ships to 5 it did NOTHING to the performance at all. The battles still lagged like hell, even worse if you asked me (after all the changes they made). And in small engagments ther was not even the slightest hind of a perfomance change at all.

Elder Bob
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2007.09.26 20:45:00 - [423]
 

Originally by: Xune
Keep you hands away from my Fighters and Carrier ! took long enough to get all of the skills to 5

edit: i know most of the goons are to " young" to remember the old times. And many of the others simply seem to have a selective perception. But back then when they changed the max drones on normal ships to 5 it did NOTHING to the performance at all. The battles still lagged like hell, even worse if you asked me (after all the changes they made). And in small engagments ther was not even the slightest hind of a perfomance change at all.
If you'll cast your mind back, RMR screwed lag up royally, as well as introducing a whole host of issues like the memory leak. We didn't see improved performance again until the deployment of dragon and the new server.

I fail to understand how you can judge the difference that drones made given that situation.

LingLeng
Caldari
Perkone
Posted - 2007.09.27 11:28:00 - [424]
 

loooooooool
goons nerf goons
you say fighers make lag?realy Oo
and goon frig ship spam?
whats about goons?i know you the nice guys lol
Rolling Eyes

Xune
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2007.09.27 13:45:00 - [425]
 

Originally by: Elder Bob
Originally by: Xune
Keep you hands away from my Fighters and Carrier ! took long enough to get all of the skills to 5

edit: i know most of the goons are to " young" to remember the old times. And many of the others simply seem to have a selective perception. But back then when they changed the max drones on normal ships to 5 it did NOTHING to the performance at all. The battles still lagged like hell, even worse if you asked me (after all the changes they made). And in small engagments ther was not even the slightest hind of a perfomance change at all.
If you'll cast your mind back, RMR screwed lag up royally, as well as introducing a whole host of issues like the memory leak. We didn't see improved performance again until the deployment of dragon and the new server.

I fail to understand how you can judge the difference that drones made given that situation.


Good point there, but alright to prove my point, lets go further back into eve history where Battleships just had 1 Bonus instead of the 2 we know today. Back then the dominix only got a damage bonus.

The performance Before the +Drone per skill and after was the same. And i should know, as it got the drone bonus we used the Dominix a lot.Yes that was even before they stacking-nerfed damage mods where it was a viable option to shieldtank it and fit the lows only with damage mods.

Kropotkin
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
Posted - 2007.10.13 13:32:00 - [426]
 

Originally by: Len Jahad
I've never been hugely bothered by ordinary server lag, because it effects everyone equally. The recent prevalence of enormous fighter swarms is a different issue, however. It's unbelievably frustrating to have fighters targeting your expensive fleet ship and watch it melt in seconds while the server struggles to catch up and allow you to do anything, and then watch the fighters continue to destroy other ships while no actual player-controlled ships are able to respond.


Isn't the straightforward solution, to eliminate the fighters' (and drones', for that matter) auto-retargeting?

Or, if you want to be subtle about it, change the allocation strategy for server resources, so that fighters' and drones' auto-retargeting is only done *after* all player-initiated targeting? Maybe something like, "do an auto-retargeting cycle only every five player-initiated-targeting cycles"?

Am I missing something?

Kropotkin
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
Posted - 2007.10.13 13:46:00 - [427]
 

Originally by: Ogresmash
One suggestion I've heard is to multiply the DPS and health of an individual fighter by 5, change the name and description to that of a fighter squadron, and divide the amount of fighters able to be deployed and controlled by carriers/motherships by 5.


Here's a problem I see with that: with five fighters, each of hitting power 1 and durability 1, a hit capable of killing one fighter will kill 1/5 of the total hitting power. But a single fightergroup of hitting power 5 and durability 5 will continue to hit with power 5 until the 5th single-fighter-killing hit arrives.

Whether making the obvious fix to that problem -- degrading the fightergroup hitting power as hits-taken accumulate -- would complexify combat computations enough to negate the beneficial effect on lag, of reducing the total number of entities flying around, I don't know.

Hmm... There's another subtlety: if four of five single fighters are destroyed, the launching ship is out 4/5 of the initial combat capability until it gets resupplied. But if a five-fighter-group is 4/5 damaged, applying the ordinary repair rules would restore it to full 5/5 combat capability. There's a straightforward fix for that one too, but again at the cost of complexifying the combat calculations.

Baulath
Posted - 2007.11.04 19:28:00 - [428]
 

Edited by: Baulath on 04/11/2007 20:45:09
I've been training for a carrier for the last few weeks. After reading posts like this I'm honestly rethinking. Lag has always been an issue in EVE and no doubt always will. Reducing the number of drones a carrier can use is a ridiculous. They are drone boats, pure and simple. Upgrade the servers before you downgrade the game play. Spend some of that cash we're all sending your way CCP to deliver what everyone is crying out for.. Better performance!

(While leaving my former post intact I would like to add the following. Upon reading more posts devoted to this topic I have changed my view point. Forcing carriers to assign drones to gang members is a great idea. As long as they can assign their full amount, 10, 15 or what ever. However, the price of drones should also dramatically fall.)
- b

Samurai XII
Posted - 2007.11.04 22:35:00 - [429]
 

Taking fighters out is not the answer. If anything, make only BS+ size ship use drones. That will take away A LOT more drones/fighters than carriers/MS = less lag.

Don't like it? Laughing

Princess Jodi
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2007.11.05 16:22:00 - [430]
 

NOT Signed!

The purpose of Carriers is to use lots of Fighters. Stop messing with that. If you think Fighters cause lag (which is debatable) then change it so that all the Fighters you launch become a single Icon on the screen. Shooting this Icon damages a random Fighter in the stack.

While I understand that this limits the ability to break apart your Fighters, in my exprience that is not desirable anyway. Obviously people can launch multiple groups of fighters seperately, thus creating multiple icons for things like assigning Fighters. Overall, however, I believe that people will want all Fighters to shoot at one target anyway.

Also, as pointed out, Drones auto-retarget: Fighters do not. So if you want to stop that ability you affect every player in Eve. Don't blame Carriers just cuz they launch a few more drones than normal ships. I would LOVE to have Fighters auto-retarget: with the lag, I feel that I'm operating at 50% effectiveness because I have to order my Fighters to attack. (It make me feel like I do when I delegate Fighters... watch half of them not being used cuz someone's a noob or they died. Whee. Rolling Eyes)

Find another way to attack Lag. But leave Fighters alone.


Dominator9987
Minmatar
Posted - 2007.11.05 16:58:00 - [431]
 

Fit out to kill cruisers when taking on fighter spam. Your wing will be satisfied with teh results.

Butternut Squash
Gallente
Macabre Votum
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2007.11.05 17:59:00 - [432]
 

It would appear that the majority of people are against nerfing a cap ships fighter ability, yet agree that something should be done to reduce the lag, IMO the next obvious entity to consider nerfing is the blob itself. If FC's only had a limited number of fleet slots then fleets may become honed to a specific task, if you think about it, we already do this when fitting out a ship to ensure we get the best results from our available cap ... fleets could just become an extension of that.

If for example a fleet were to consist of 200 fleet slots, a carrier may consume 5 of those slots, with each additional fighter consuming another fleet slot, this would make fleet battles an extension of the FC's tactical ability.

I can imagine FC's having substitutes warming up on the touchline waiting to come on Laughing

Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2007.11.05 19:04:00 - [433]
 

Originally by: Butternut Squash
It would appear that the majority of people are against nerfing a cap ships fighter ability, yet agree that something should be done to reduce the lag, IMO the next obvious entity to consider nerfing is the blob itself. If FC's only had a limited number of fleet slots then fleets may become honed to a specific task, if you think about it, we already do this when fitting out a ship to ensure we get the best results from our available cap ... fleets could just become an extension of that.

If for example a fleet were to consist of 200 fleet slots, a carrier may consume 5 of those slots, with each additional fighter consuming another fleet slot, this would make fleet battles an extension of the FC's tactical ability.

No, alliances would just bring multiple fleets.

YouNoob
Posted - 2007.11.05 19:24:00 - [434]
 

/signed

Butternut Squash
Gallente
Macabre Votum
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2007.11.05 19:31:00 - [435]
 

Originally by: Scatim Helicon

No, alliances would just bring multiple fleets.



But that is surely just a game dynamic that could be accounted for in the coding, preventing/restricting alliances (those of positive standing to each other) from using more than a single fleet.

Azuse
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2007.11.05 20:56:00 - [436]
 

Oh this is golden.

We all get up in arms about ccp cutting fighters, this lot think, "ok that's that sorted now why hasn't ccp done anything about fighter lag?"

and they say the forums don't reduce iq Laughing

Sir Bart
Vendetta Underground
Rule of Three
Posted - 2007.11.05 21:39:00 - [437]
 

Edited by: Sir Bart on 05/11/2007 21:42:34
I agree that the lag should stop but not with the ideas in how to improve.

I think the drones need to be just coded in a way that if a ship launches drones or fighters they are a single entity called a drone swarm. The drones swarm has combined hitpoints of all the drones, combined dps, averaged velocity, and you can't mix drones in a swarm so if you want to launch 3 heavies and 2 mediums, you can't, you just pick between heavies or mediums or fighters. It's targetable and shooting it / webbing it works as if it were happening to a ship.... that is, the whole swarm gets webbed or shot or whatever.

This would slightly nerf drones since they would be easier to kill so to combat that, have it so that drones sig radius is reduced slightly and their HP is increased slightly. It's easier to kill all of a players drones but since you have to kill them all to kill one you also take full dmg from their drones until it's done so it's not a total nerf.

Anyways, that would reduce the amount of drone / fighter lag in all forms of combat by a factor of 5 so how about it?

edit:
Also to prevent the issue of having exponential increase of server lag based on objects in a grid, just change code so that at 90% server load, collision detection is turned off... ships can't bump into each other, then the server load becomes linear and it spends it's effort on the important stuff, like how much damage so-and-so is taking.

-Bart

Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2007.11.05 22:19:00 - [438]
 

Originally by: Azuse
Oh this is golden.

We all get up in arms about ccp cutting fighters, this lot think, "ok that's that sorted now why hasn't ccp done anything about fighter lag?"

and they say the forums don't reduce iq Laughing

Thread was started before CCP said anything about a fighter nerf Wink


Pages: first : previous : ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15]

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