open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked [Proposal] I have fixed lag.
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9

Author Topic

SargeantNekkid DDS
Posted - 2010.12.12 17:17:00 - [61]
 


Sciencegeek deathdealer
Posted - 2010.12.12 17:47:00 - [62]
 

This. Is. Genius.

Exclamation

Tek Handle
Biotronics Inc.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2010.12.12 17:53:00 - [63]
 


JitaPriceChecker2
Posted - 2010.12.12 18:22:00 - [64]
 

Good

Hecatonis
Amarr
Posted - 2010.12.12 18:30:00 - [65]
 

Edited by: Hecatonis on 12/12/2010 18:38:58
Originally by: Kabaal S'sylistha
10 minutes = 60000% speed change = 600 * 3000 ships = You are upset it might take 10 minutes per second with 18,000,000 ships in one system? Holy math, Mr. Slippery slope guy. Percentages are what, first grade?


dude, you are way too cranky, lag is not linear its best described as exponential (number of actions)^(number of observers) you should really read the dev blogs it was explained a bit.

Quote:

As for the development time, your failure at math is going to make me fairly certain you have no idea what coding entails or how it actually works.


and your failure at understanding makes me very certain that you know even less in what where the problem is. please attempt to be a little educated before making remarkable bad comments like this

Quote:

Having done it, I know well how what seems like a monumental change can be done in two or three lines, and some tiny edit would break the code. If you aren't staring at the source code, development arguments fail.


please submit the games you help develop and code on the same scale as eve.
__________________________________________________________________________________________

i like this idea, as long as there are limits put in place to stop spamming commands. unless that is done the extra time would just give people more time to extend the backlog even more

Tres Farmer
Gallente Federation Intelligence Service
Posted - 2010.12.12 18:43:00 - [66]
 

Edited by: Tres Farmer on 12/12/2010 18:44:04
The physics engine can't be slowed down as you get recoils:
- missiles will miss although in range, as they overshoot
- ships will 'penetrate deeper' and be flung away faster/stronger
- orbiting/course changes will be calculated slower so you get out of your 'optimal' more often
- ..
- if it were that 'easy' CCP would have implemented this ages ago

Ranka Mei
Caldari
Posted - 2010.12.13 00:57:00 - [67]
 

Edited by: Ranka Mei on 13/12/2010 00:57:50

It's a crazy idea, LOL, but it might just work. :)

+1

Kabaal S'sylistha
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.12.13 00:59:00 - [68]
 

If it was events^observers we would lag out before 100 people were on grid.
It's more like (events*observers)*(observers), or events*observers^2. This also isn't the issue.

My math in that post was pretty godawful, yes, but how lag increases really isn't the issue. If a blade can handle a million events in one second without lag (made up*), then if it was 'bullet-timed' to take 10 minutes it could handle 600 million events per second without lag.

Say a ship does 10 events per second average (for easy math). Do some quick algebra and you get it can handle 1000 ships on without lag or slowdown. If you make it 2 real seconds per game second you get 1414 ships without true lag. At 10 seconds bullet time (what I'd consider the peak end of the actual implementation) it would handle over 3000, a 300% increase with more stability for a 1000% time increase (which sounds bad until you compare it to "Everyone lags out and you can't do anything"). If it reached the 10 minute mark suggested by the one opponent, you would need 25000 ships, or 2500% of original.

You got me. I threw out numbers quickly on a random forum post to some guy playing naysayer to a good idea.

And the game I coded for was called Lithmeria, a text MUD. Go look it up, it's in beta but if you're a fan of text games it's a homebrew project by some good MUD vets. Thinking the 'scale' of the game matters when considering code and lag optimization is silly, though.

Zibu 81
Tribal Liberation Force
Posted - 2010.12.13 01:36:00 - [69]
 

There are several things that you don't take into account.
If you slowed down the time, to a point where it takes 10 seconds for server tick you may find some strange situations, like:
- If the opposing fleet is warping out to a different gate (which now would take 10 minutes instead the usual 1), instead of pursuing them in warp it may be easier just to jump out, and travel around the system (in normal time) to intercept them at the other gate before they come out of warp...
- Even in the slowed down time you won't be able to fly your interceptor between all the BSes. The best you could do is make one direction change every 10 seconds.
- How would you slow it and speed it up? Based on what? Say you bomb 50 people at the same time, and they all die (and get podded) and leave the system, would the system suddenly speed up and make everything go way faster than it should?
- How would this impact things like session changes, jump in cloak, etc?

With the way it works today most people just give up on issuing new commands, as they know it won't make any difference, now if you guaranteed that every command you issue would be executed people would start spamming a lot more commands which would cause the system to slow down way more than you would assume.

And in the end you would be just as frustrated as the system would be just as unresponsive (well, maybe a bit less, but still unresponsive) as you'd have to wait up to 10 seconds (or rather a minute or couple minutes) for a module to activate.

Astroka
Posted - 2010.12.13 01:39:00 - [70]
 

Edited by: Astroka on 13/12/2010 01:43:00
Hmm could this actually be a useful and good idea?

It can't be. Yet...it is.

Although how large of an area would it affect? One system? That would cause some problems with people in other systems that are involved. They'd be doing everything much faster in comparison.

Lilla Kharn
Amarr
Posted - 2010.12.13 03:53:00 - [71]
 

I give my support for this. Maybe something base on how many players are in system like the server will start to slow down in intervals starting at 1000 players.

Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute

Posted - 2010.12.13 06:03:00 - [72]
 

I really like this.

The only problem is your #2 point: reinforcements.

While one system plays 1 minute in 15 minutes, the rest of the systems play 15 minutes in 15 minutes. Therefore, you can swap to a new ship and join the battle 15 times as fast as you should. More reinforcements being able to pile into an already lagged situation will only make it worse, not better. And because ships are not exploding fast enough because of time slowing down, it will get worse and worse until you might as well shut down the server because playing 1 minute per hour or 1 minute every couple of hours is not worth playing.

Still this is a good idea that CCP should be working on, supporting!

Reed Tiburon
Caldari
Future Corps
Sleeper Social Club
Posted - 2010.12.13 19:26:00 - [73]
 

Originally by: Lord's Servant
Edited by: Lord''s Servant on 28/11/2010 18:21:10
**** YEAH!!!!

There are, however, 2-fold issues with this.

1.) With no "lag" (ie lost cycles, improperly applied dps), on the scale that alliances are able to deploy caps/supercaps, we're gonna see some SCARY dps applied. caps/supers instapopping every single cycle anyone? :)

2.) I can see alpha getting pretty scary


Both of these are a direct result of the game getting more playable. I don't see a problem vOv

Quote:
3.) goodbye armor RR, we can't use you anymore as you take an ENTIRE cycle to give me HP, hello shields, instant HP the second I take dmg ftw.... :)


This could be an issue... on the other hand, considering the CPU requirements of shield RR and the relative abundance of armor-tanking ships compared to shield tanking, I don't think anything has to change. In fact, since EVERYTHING is moving slower, including targeting and DPS, it gives the armor logis a chance to apply reps with better reflexes, resulting in better RR.

Originally by: Kabaal S'sylistha
The only issue really is the one you pointed out about reinforcements technically having more time to arrive. It also gives CCP time for node reinforcement (not sure if they can do this on the fly, but I understand it's some possibility), and it doesn't alter any mechanics for the game itself within the slow down scenario. This keeps it from encouraging metagame "So if we bring this many we can have X effect, we can use this!", since all it does is literally slow the game down if it gets to a lag situation.


I don't really see the metagaming as a problem either. You say that people may purposely put the system into "bullet-time" in order to have more time to get reinforcements... but to purposely "slow down" the system, you would have to jump people into the system until it lags... aka... you would have to bring reinforcements...

Basically you would have more time to actually coordinate reinforcements, but getting there, jumping in, loading grid etc. takes the same time. And both sides get the same time advantage.

And as an added benefit, you get more efficient primary calling / tactics in general, which reduces the time spent in laggy battles.

Originally by: Tyber Zaan
Originally by: Black Dranzer
Edited by: Black Dranzer on 28/11/2010 06:24:45
http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/6380/wellactually.gif



Sums up my reaction perfectly.

Supported.


Same here Laughing



The key that I see is that there has to be a visible UI indication that informs everyone on the node (aka, several systems) that it is experiencing bullet-time effects. Or, if you prefer, you can create separate levels of "bullet-time" - sending the node into BT 1 = 0.5x time dilation, BT 2 = 0.25x, etc. This creates a concrete indication of the level of latency, rather than the uncertainty that comes with lag.

After all, the whole point is consistency between the front-end and the back-end, and the point should be to clearly communicate to the players exactly how the game will behave for a given action.

I really don't think we'll fully understand the downsides to this idea until we implement it, and it could be a really good idea. Supported.




fakeedit: When trying to post this I got a "Time Flux Error". Laughing
fakeedit2: Apparently now something happened to the "Planck Bubble Stabilizer". This idea is so good it crashed the forum!

Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.12.13 21:47:00 - [74]
 

The point that should be emphasized is that making this feature requires rewrite of core game logic code. It is a massive undertaking. It would probably cost CCP about 1 million dollars in man hours (unless they pay minimum wage, then it's not so much)

Neo160
Posted - 2010.12.14 03:11:00 - [75]
 

Fight Lag with LAG?? What is this i dont even....hold on a second...this is so freaking crazy it JUST MIGHT WORK!!!Shocked

joking aside, WHOLLY COW, you are a GENIUS, I totally support this, and in fact, fiction wise, lag has been explained this way, so implementiing it into fiction has already been done Laughing.

furthuremore, this solution could be implemented while devs tackle lag, and when (or if) they eventually do, they wouldnt need to remove bullet time because it wont be activated!!Very Happy

THIS NEEDS MOAR SUPPORTS

Seamus Donohue
Gallente
Posted - 2010.12.14 05:57:00 - [76]
 

Supported in principle.

If this is implemented, then ALL game logic will have to be internally calculated in terms of ticks and not seconds.

For example, in a normal situation, ticks and seconds are the same thing, and if someone is firing a turret volley every 10 seconds at a battleship that's moving 250 meters per tick, then the battleship can cover 2.5 kilometers per volley.

However, if the system is heavily populated and goes into "bullet time", then you don't want a situation where the battleship is still only moving 250 meters per tick, but the turret modules are still firing once per 10 seconds (rather than once per 10 ticks). Let's say the lag is bad enough that the server needs to take 5 seconds per tick. If the battleship is going 250 meters per tick and the turrets are firing once per 10 seconds, then the turrets are firing once per two ticks. That battleship is now only covering 500 meters per volley being shot at it.

Making sure that module events get slowed down in proportion with Destiny ticks might play merry havoc with the event scheduling, because now you have to manage a time axis that's different from the rest of Tranquility. Would a CCP Developer like to explain whether or not this is actually a problem, please?

So, yeah, supported in principle. I'd love to hear, though, if it's actually feasible.

Wartrec
Posted - 2010.12.15 14:30:00 - [77]
 

This is an interesting idea but the whole universe would have to slow down. EVE is influenced by all areas and you cant have other area moving at full speed and one area moving in slow motion.

Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.12.15 19:31:00 - [78]
 

Edited by: Ephemeron on 15/12/2010 19:32:09
Originally by: Wartrec
This is an interesting idea but the whole universe would have to slow down. EVE is influenced by all areas and you cant have other area moving at full speed and one area moving in slow motion.
actually you can, but you'd have to make sure player skill points don't slow down, and all the production going on in outposts and moon mining has to keep same rate. Only combat has to slow down

Anyway, it's all possible if designed with proper frame work. But that's not how EVE is designed. And changing the frame work is ****loads of work.

Chesty McJubblies
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
Posted - 2010.12.15 20:06:00 - [79]
 

tl;dr. But your proposal is that you have fixed lag?

Well done.

The Darkkness
Posted - 2010.12.15 21:39:00 - [80]
 

Kind of a bandaid solution, but a solution nonetheless.

Aeronwen Carys
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2010.12.16 10:27:00 - [81]
 

Gets my support

Blastfizzle
THE R0NIN
Posted - 2010.12.24 12:16:00 - [82]
 

I support this!

It would some using to, but then - 2000 man battle?! WORKING PROPERLY?!?! DO WANT!!!

Very good idea indeed.

Big Bit
Posted - 2010.12.24 12:31:00 - [83]
 

It was here few years ago, but wny not? Laughing

Shinomura VI
Posted - 2010.12.24 12:57:00 - [84]
 

I support this.

I also believe to get rid of lag on such massive grid is kind of out off possibilities of anybody. This may be manageable.

Garrick Spacesailer
Posted - 2010.12.24 13:20:00 - [85]
 

I love it

Adrenaline kicks, anyone?

Kethry Avenger
PIE Inc.

Posted - 2010.12.24 15:30:00 - [86]
 

Me and all my alts support this.

I think slow down on other systems on the node would be better than lag for no reason in a system with only 2 people in it while running a mission. Though of course ideally limiting the temporal distortion to one system, is better than one node, with the best being localized to one grid. If/When CCP figure out how to split solar systems up into multiple nodes.

I don't think shutting down the gates into the system makes sense but it would make sense if your jump into the system was effected as well with a traffic advisory or temporal distortion advisory anyway.

The thing about having more time to bring support is that both sides in theory have the extra time to bring reinforcements. Though never having been part of any major 0.0 conflict I don't know how these things go down usually.

Raging George
Caldari
Raging Inc.
Posted - 2010.12.24 15:35:00 - [87]
 

Though a bit harder to implement. There are already features of system wide effects, this could just be a more functional one of those. That happens to be dynamic.

George K'ntara
Gallente
We Build Stuff Inc.

Posted - 2010.12.24 15:41:00 - [88]
 

Not that this will have much to do with me and my carebearing, but it is a very clever idea that deserves a chance to be tested out.

How much trouble is it for CCP to do a test feature? Seems like this is an issue that has very vocal population even if the 0.0 population in general is smaller than that of highsec. But if 0.0 is one of the end games in EVE then isn't at least attempting it worth some development time. Or at least a CCP brainstorming session. Though I would rather they spend time first trying to get that total fleet fight number as high as software and hardware could make it first then roll with the punch that is massive fleet fight lag.

Brennivargur
Posted - 2010.12.24 17:11:00 - [89]
 

i am ok with this

Chekov Nikahd
Amarr
Posted - 2010.12.25 01:54:00 - [90]
 

Originally by: Zibu 81
There are several things that you don't take into account.
If you slowed down the time, to a point where it takes 10 seconds for server tick you may find some strange situations, like:
- If the opposing fleet is warping out to a different gate (which now would take 10 minutes instead the usual 1), instead of pursuing them in warp it may be easier just to jump out, and travel around the system (in normal time) to intercept them at the other gate before they come out of warp...
- Even in the slowed down time you won't be able to fly your interceptor between all the BSes. The best you could do is make one direction change every 10 seconds.
- How would you slow it and speed it up? Based on what? Say you bomb 50 people at the same time, and they all die (and get podded) and leave the system, would the system suddenly speed up and make everything go way faster than it should?
- How would this impact things like session changes, jump in cloak, etc?



And just what do you think the alternative is? [Also, you have already seemingly decided how it's going to work and attacked this imaginary implementation, which quite frankly leaves half of your post rather pointless.]

If the choice is between "not being able to do anything and being lag killed after half an hour of waiting for things to load" and "actually playing and fighting, but the speed is slowed down" I'm taking the second option. Your "issues" are just new gameplay avenues and new tactics.

I fully support this idea OP, thumbs up.


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

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