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


 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4

Author Topic

CCP Fallout

Posted - 2008.10.16 13:32:00 - [1]
 

"The who," you may ask. The EVE Performance Group is our crack team of researchers and investigators who spend a considerable amount of time working on making EVE Online run better, faster and smarter. You can learn a great deal about them by reading Tanis.'s new dev blog.

Kappas.
Galaxy Punks
Posted - 2008.10.16 13:35:00 - [2]
 

Glad to see moar work is being done on this Smile

Chribba
Otherworld Enterprises
Otherworld Empire
Posted - 2008.10.16 13:43:00 - [3]
 


Letouk Mernel
Caldari
Posted - 2008.10.16 13:48:00 - [4]
 

Sounds very interesting, and it sounds like you're doing a very good job.

I don't know if it's possible, but you guys should also look at reducing lag by manipulating the interface so that WE interact with it in a more efficient way. Don't know if it's possible, but stuff like reducing the need for us to move items so much, or letting us configure contract list filters before loading the whole thing, alarms on market orders that would reduce the need to refresh the market window every 2 seconds to see if you've been .01'd, etc.

DaDutchDude
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
Posted - 2008.10.16 13:53:00 - [5]
 

Edited by: DaDutchDude on 16/10/2008 13:53:13
Excellent blog regarding performance, showing it as a many-headed beast instead of just one monster to slay. Keep these blogs coming.

I'm especially curious about the weapon grouping. My imagination tells me that it'll probably mean firing and reloading weapons as a group instead of on a turret by turret basis, making one call to the DB per group instead of one per turret required, which would offer great tactical opportunities in-game for players and reduce load significantly .... which sounds all yummy! YAY!

Onyx Asablot
The Vicious Circle
Posted - 2008.10.16 14:02:00 - [6]
 

IMHO the 'need for speed' initiative is the singularly most important development that CCP is involved with in EVE. Thanks for your hard work, and I look forward to seeing smoother fleet fights in future.

Batolemaeus
Caldari
Free-Space-Ranger
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2008.10.16 14:19:00 - [7]
 

On the Npc changes:

Of course, reducing rof for npcs is easier for you guys, just run a script that reduces rof and increases damage. <insert one-line-of-code joke here>

But please also poke the mission design team about it. I'm pretty sure reducing the numbers of those npc, and increasing their damage potential, will free up a lot more ressources.

CCP Ytterbium

Posted - 2008.10.16 14:39:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Batolemaeus
On the Npc changes:

Of course, reducing rof for npcs is easier for you guys, just run a script that reduces rof and increases damage. <insert one-line-of-code joke here>

But please also poke the mission design team about it. I'm pretty sure reducing the numbers of those npc, and increasing their damage potential, will free up a lot more ressources.


We are aware of this situation and you bring up a good point here.

The problem remains it is far less easy than it sounds to change, since reducing NPC numbers means balancing bounties/loot to keep rewards on the same level. Also, plain increase in damage is not the best way to go since a mission that may be easy for a veteran pilot with skills and experience may turn horribly difficult for a relatively new character.

Batolemaeus
Caldari
Free-Space-Ranger
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2008.10.16 14:46:00 - [9]
 

Sure that isn't just one line of code.

But as you said it, if you do it, do it right.

I'm waiting for the total PvE revamp-roundhousekick Cool


(Congrats on fixing lag by the way)

Andy Rogerson
Posted - 2008.10.16 14:50:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: CCP Tanis.
One in particular that we've worked on is a procedure handling corporation faction standings. We found that the procedure was taking up far more time than we were comfortable with and that prompted not just a refactoring of the code, but a change in the way that corporation faction standings are calculated to be much more efficient. The system used to update standings slowly, over time, based on the standings of all a corps members plus a large number of other factors. What we've done is to simplify that greatly. The new system will calculate standings based only on the average of all members who have been a part of the corporation for 7 days or more without factoring in anything else. Not only is the new way much easier for the server to handle, but it is also much easier to verify that it's working correctly.

Isn't this something you felt you should announce or at least think about a little bit? A non-announced change to a mechanic that certain players rely on in the game? Talk about a nerf -- those people selling their services as "standings-raisers" are SOL. No longer will they just be able to join a corp that the owner has left a 0-standings alt in, run a storyline and wait a couple of days -- they're completely unable to do their job unless their client completely leaves the corp (as the 0-standings alt will apparently count in the standings now), which means that they now have to build up trust where previously game mechanics protected their client (the standings-raiser needed no rights under the old system, and now has to be basically the only character in the corp).

Any other game mechanics that are being changed without bothering to tell us in the name of "performance"? I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but being mentioned as a specific example in a performance blog isn't exactly an announcment...

Chaos Incarnate
Faceless Logistics
Posted - 2008.10.16 15:01:00 - [11]
 

Yeah, I'd have to question about the corp standings changes - are characters with 0 standings not going to be counted still, and is there any possibility of reducing the timer for standings changes to two or three days in-corp?

Chaos Incarnate
Faceless Logistics
Posted - 2008.10.16 15:03:00 - [12]
 

Also, who nerfed my face? Fixitfixitfixit!

CCP Lingorm


C C P
Posted - 2008.10.16 15:12:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Andy Rogerson

Isn't this something you felt you should announce or at least think about a little bit? A non-announced change to a mechanic that certain players rely on in the game? Talk about a nerf -- those people selling their services as "standings-raisers" are SOL. No longer will they just be able to join a corp that the owner has left a 0-standings alt in, run a storyline and wait a couple of days -- they're completely unable to do their job unless their client completely leaves the corp (as the 0-standings alt will apparently count in the standings now), which means that they now have to build up trust where previously game mechanics protected their client (the standings-raiser needed no rights under the old system, and now has to be basically the only character in the corp).

Any other game mechanics that are being changed without bothering to tell us in the name of "performance"? I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but being mentioned as a specific example in a performance blog isn't exactly an announcment...

I will double check, but 0 standings characters are not counted in the calculation. And this will make it quicker for the Standings Merc, as after 7 days the increase will be applied completely rather than slowly, taking up to 14 days with the previous trending.

The calculation goes like this ... get me all the none 0 standings of all members of the corp that have been in the corp 7 days or more.
Now calculate the average and set the corp standing to this.

Hope this makes it clearer.


CCP Lingorm


C C P
Posted - 2008.10.16 15:12:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: Chaos Incarnate
Also, who nerfed my face? Fixitfixitfixit!

Buwahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Reptzo
Channel 4 News Team
Veritas Immortalis
Posted - 2008.10.16 15:13:00 - [15]
 

So, are these changes going to be rolled out as they are ready? or wait for a big patch?

Awesome blog.

Grainsalt
Lorentzian Traversable Corporation
Posted - 2008.10.16 15:29:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: CCP Lingorm
Originally by: Andy Rogerson

Isn't this something you felt you should announce or at least think about a little bit? A non-announced change to a mechanic that certain players rely on in the game? Talk about a nerf -- those people selling their services as "standings-raisers" are SOL. No longer will they just be able to join a corp that the owner has left a 0-standings alt in, run a storyline and wait a couple of days -- they're completely unable to do their job unless their client completely leaves the corp (as the 0-standings alt will apparently count in the standings now), which means that they now have to build up trust where previously game mechanics protected their client (the standings-raiser needed no rights under the old system, and now has to be basically the only character in the corp).

Any other game mechanics that are being changed without bothering to tell us in the name of "performance"? I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but being mentioned as a specific example in a performance blog isn't exactly an announcment...

I will double check, but 0 standings characters are not counted in the calculation. And this will make it quicker for the Standings Merc, as after 7 days the increase will be applied completely rather than slowly, taking up to 14 days with the previous trending.

The calculation goes like this ... get me all the none 0 standings of all members of the corp that have been in the corp 7 days or more.
Now calculate the average and set the corp standing to this.

Hope this makes it clearer.




Becuase if it ain't you have a rather large sh*t storm flying your way .. Bye Bye Empire POS's Very Happy

Chaos Incarnate
Faceless Logistics
Posted - 2008.10.16 16:02:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: CCP Lingorm
Originally by: Chaos Incarnate
Also, who nerfed my face? Fixitfixitfixit!

Buwahahahahahahahahahahahahaha



Lingorm has no shame Sad

Booooooooooo Laughing

Thebro Nobrunder
Schrodinger's Renegades
Posted - 2008.10.16 16:28:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: CCP Ytterbium

We are aware of this situation and you bring up a good point here.

The problem remains it is far less easy than it sounds to change, since reducing NPC numbers means balancing bounties/loot to keep rewards on the same level. Also, plain increase in damage is not the best way to go since a mission that may be easy for a veteran pilot with skills and experience may turn horribly difficult for a relatively new character.


I would very much like to see fewer stronger npc's in missions. Fighting tons of frigates in a lvl 4 missions is a pain in the but... also trivial.



Weirda
Minmatar
Queens of the Stone Age
Rote Kapelle
Posted - 2008.10.16 16:33:00 - [19]
 

Weirda like blog!

Also know it difficult to get proper resource and time to 'improve existing process' vs 'add new feature'. glad that CCP focus on how important this is!

EyeCeeYou
Posted - 2008.10.16 16:44:00 - [20]
 

Someone posted this concern in a different thread, but I'll repeat it here since this thread seems to have some Dev attention --

With weapon linking, does the server calculate all linked weapons as a hit or miss together? If so, please consider the effect of this on current interceptor tactics, which often times means orbiting with fingers crossed and breaking and running after 2-3-4 hits. If the alpha strike now will be, for example, 7 turrets at once, that could be instapop, right?

Combined with lowered speed (and consequently increased tracking), have intys gone the way of the dodo???

DrAtomic
Atomic Heroes
Chain of Chaos
Posted - 2008.10.16 16:45:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Reptzo
So, are these changes going to be rolled out as they are ready? or wait for a big patch?

Awesome blog.


ffs... retyping responses for the loose... hate these forums sometimes... here goes again:

They are rolled out continously if possible of during regular dt as far as i have been able to get from random notes here and there. So lots of these changes are allready live and others still in development/analyses.

Also it sounds that the eve code was one big undocumented mess which they spend heaps of time getting through and documenting what does what and then analysing it and improve if need be.

Good stuff.

DrAtomic
Atomic Heroes
Chain of Chaos
Posted - 2008.10.16 16:48:00 - [22]
 

Edited by: DrAtomic on 16/10/2008 16:50:57
Originally by: EyeCeeYou
Someone posted this concern in a different thread, but I'll repeat it here since this thread seems to have some Dev attention --

With weapon linking, does the server calculate all linked weapons as a hit or miss together? If so, please consider the effect of this on current interceptor tactics, which often times means orbiting with fingers crossed and breaking and running after 2-3-4 hits. If the alpha strike now will be, for example, 7 turrets at once, that could be instapop, right?

Combined with lowered speed (and consequently increased tracking), have intys gone the way of the dodo???


There is a dev response out there on a thread that was in general, basicly the new system will do an average calculation total determine damage modifier(5 times normal+1 wrecking+1miss)*ammo*skill*etc=damage done, thus doing one big calculation instead of the 7 separate ones it would have done in the current system). At least that is what I understood from it.

Altaree
The Graduates
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2008.10.16 17:04:00 - [23]
 

Edited by: Altaree on 16/10/2008 17:16:01
If you want to fix motsu, you need to put more level 4 quality 20 agents in 0.5 systems around the game. There are VERY few of these. And most are caldari! Please take the time to map out where the high sec l4q20 agents are. Until this is fixed you won't fix these l4 missions hubs.

Also, please look into how research is done on POS's and how mutitple manufacturing jobs are setup. This is a painfully slow process. Even worse, if you are doing POS research from a station, the interface doesn't remember the radius of the last search so for every opening of the research interface there are two queries to see what facilities you can use. And the first of those queries is garbage.

On a final note, Good Blog! Great developer ****!

CCP Tanis

Posted - 2008.10.16 17:29:00 - [24]
 

Edited by: CCP Tanis. on 17/10/2008 11:36:33
[Edit:Updated info below]

Originally by: Andy Rogerson
Originally by: CCP Tanis.
One in particular that we've worked on is a procedure handling corporation faction standings. We found that the procedure was taking up far more time than we were comfortable with and that prompted not just a refactoring of the code, but a change in the way that corporation faction standings are calculated to be much more efficient. The system used to update standings slowly, over time, based on the standings of all a corps members plus a large number of other factors. What we've done is to simplify that greatly. The new system will calculate standings based only on the average of all members who have been a part of the corporation for 7 days or more without factoring in anything else. Not only is the new way much easier for the server to handle, but it is also much easier to verify that it's working correctly.

Isn't this something you felt you should announce or at least think about a little bit? A non-announced change to a mechanic that certain players rely on in the game? Talk about a nerf -- those people selling their services as "standings-raisers" are SOL. No longer will they just be able to join a corp that the owner has left a 0-standings alt in, run a storyline and wait a couple of days -- they're completely unable to do their job unless their client completely leaves the corp (as the 0-standings alt will apparently count in the standings now), which means that they now have to build up trust where previously game mechanics protected their client (the standings-raiser needed no rights under the old system, and now has to be basically the only character in the corp).

Any other game mechanics that are being changed without bothering to tell us in the name of "performance"? I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but being mentioned as a specific example in a performance blog isn't exactly an announcment...



Rest assured that characters with neutral (zero) standings will NOT factor into the mix. The formula is still counting the same members it was counting before, we've just cut out a lot of fluff. If you were to think of your corporation standings like a bucket of water the old system filled that bucket one cup at a time where as the new system fills it all in one go.

Example:
You have a corporation with 1 member, who is neutral to everyone. You then have someone join who is at +9 to Caldari state.

Old system:
* Only standings that have changed within the last ten days are counted
Your corporations standings would update slowly, after 1 week and 1 day they might be +1, after another day +1.5, then +2, and so on until it finally catches up with what the average value actually is.

New system:
* ALL non-neutral standings are counted (This might be changed back)
After the new member has been in corp for 7 days or more your corporation standings would now be +9 for Caldari state.

As you can see; with the new system you get the full benefits of your standings immediately after the waiting period rather than it slowly changing over a long period of time as it does on TQ right now. Hopefully you guys share our opinion that the new way is clearly better.

NOTE: In either case it takes 7 days before any new members standings are counted into the average, but with the new system you get the full benefit immediately after the 7 days is up rather than it slowly trickling in over a long period of time.


I hope this alleviates any worries you guys may have had.

Andy Rogerson
Posted - 2008.10.16 17:55:00 - [25]
 

Originally by: CCP Tanis.
[snip]
Rest assured that characters with neutral (zero) standings will NOT factor into the mix. The formula is still counting the same members it was counting before, we've just cut out a lot of fluff. If you were to think of your corporation standings like a bucket of water the old system filled that bucket one cup at a time where as the new system fills it all in one go.
[snip]
I hope this alleviates any worries you guys may have had.


Yep -- it'll take a bit longer for a contractor to do their thing if you're anchoring in 0.5, but perhaps a bit less in 0.7. Regardless, it's definately an easier system to understand than the old way (too much math). I guess I was just trying to use this as an example to suggest that changes in game mechanics (even if it seems like a minor thing and a big performance boost) should at least be mentioned in patch notes or the like. Or maybe I'm just feeling that way because I got chewed out by a user this morning over a bug that we fixed on our website that he was relying on :)

Eraggan Sadarr
Comply Or Die
Posted - 2008.10.16 17:59:00 - [26]
 

Very nice to have these blogs about what really happens in the need for speed initiative. Keep up the good work Smile

Imhothar Xarodit
Minmatar
Wolverine Solutions
Posted - 2008.10.16 18:43:00 - [27]
 

I'm glad you finally took a look at the item handling.
But I'm sad it took so long.

It was so obvious that it is an issue when you move large batches of items. Too much traffic invovled. Client freezes for minutes or more (if it's really lots of items), refining is the same. The fact the client really freezes up and becomes totally unresponsive (market reload, moving items, refining items, warping into busy grid, populating long GUI lists/tables etc) is something that should be on the top list as well. Honestly, a client freezing as soon as there is much I/O traffic is a serious issue and I hope your performance task force is also looking at client performance. More multithreading, or if Python makes problems (like the GIL), use coroutines or stepwise executable functions, etc. Be creative, there is lots of possibilities Wink

Next issue that I would like to mention to show an example: Drag & drop items from container A to container B onto a different stack. Currently the server moves the item into the new container and stacks them AFTERWARDS, resulting in an unnecessary network call that would be handled faster on the sever's side, you can't do anything with the "temporary" item anyway.
The morale: if you find call patterns that are always executed in the same order and are composed of already existing calls (like the example of move -> stack), combine them in one single, new call. I hope the guys in that team are educated system optimizers with deep knowledge of the software system.

Another thing I was wondering:
You can call C API's by Python. And I think most people will agree that native compiled machine code is way faster then any bytecode interpreter can ever be. Do you store frequently used and intensively tested Python code pieces into compiled C code? I assume so, but just in case (really just in case) you don't, any specific reasons?

Jaala Creed
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2008.10.16 19:19:00 - [28]
 

Is the Eve Performance Group also working on InfiniBand? Or is that a different developer group?

To continue on that, how is InfiniBand developing?

We haven't heard from that for a while and its a VERY promising technology.. Please toss us some bones from that?

Thanks,
Jaala

adriaans
Amarr
Ankaa.
Nair Al-Zaurak
Posted - 2008.10.16 19:27:00 - [29]
 

cool blog, keep whipping those hamstersWink


btw, whats the weapon grouping i keep hearing about?

Tara Yang
Posted - 2008.10.16 19:34:00 - [30]
 

Edited by: Tara Yang on 16/10/2008 20:42:05
Didn't read the blog yet, and might be a bit of topic altough according to the infamous blog it does have to do with performance. It amazes me that while the infamous ghost training blog thread got ignored by almost everyone from CCP and no comments from CCP's side this thread already has more comments by CCP members then I can Count (well probebly could count it but i'm lazy).

Hope this reply doesn't get delete (or gets lost any other wat)

Edit: Read the blog. Somehow I think the new standing system might be more easy to abuse. Cause it will always take 7 days for standings to change. You have a 7day period for instance to do alot of lvl4 missions for one NPC corp and increase your standings without the help of a corp mate. Becasue if I recall correctly missions are based on user standing OR corp standing right? Or Am I looking at it the wrong way. Please do correct me If I'm wrong


Pages: [1] 2 3 4

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