EVE-Search ForumWatch http://eve-search.com/ The alternative EVE-Online Forum browser. en-us Tue, 6 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0000 EVE-Search RSS Module v1.1 chribba@evemail <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by F90OEX]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=14#403
IMO OP had a point

I like 0.0 warfare, I got tired of jumping into a system with 300 in the system and its hoping the grid loads for you. Never did for me LaughingLaughing







]]> Sun, 17 Aug 2009 17:12:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8554752 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Xevan Templar]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=14#402 Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: SiJira
no we dont want to walk in stations

i want to runYARRRR!!
Nice necro, idiot.


Seemingly SiJira is bumping all kinds of necro threads atm Rolling Eyes


]]> Sun, 17 Aug 2009 16:54:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8554658 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Pnandor]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=14#401 Edited by: Pnandor on 17/08/2008 16:33:09
Originally by: Alpha Prime
Edited by: Alpha Prime on 13/07/2008 13:11:04

Ever since we've heard & seen this, i have spoken to alot of
players concerning this waste of manhours gone into this
huge waste of effort.

Every player i've spoken to, wants a stable EVE before we even
think about being able to walk inside stations. Yet, CCP continues
to ignore our request/need for stability and keeps adding
new content which is currently not needed.

This last year i've seen almost all veteran players i know
of, leave EVE because its boring. No one wants to fight these
alliance laggwars. And eventhou Oveur, hilmar and CCP keeps praising
about their 'new hardware' and 'super computers', we never
get to fully enjoy the capacity that EVE could have.

I've played EVE since beta and i can honestly say that EVE
is boring the crap out of me atm, and im not the only one.
If it weren't for the community and all the crazy players
i know, i would not play this game anymore. The only thing
EVE offers at this time, is 3 things.

Alliancelaggwars.
occasional Gank.
Make isk.

There simple is not many players left in EVE that enjoys a good
fight. Most alliances are about making isk and sitting in their
safe & secured cynojammed systems counting their assets, living
happely ever after.

EVE for me, is about warfare and pvp. I'm not happy if i don't get
to shoot an enemy for some time. I can't stand making isk, its boring.
Other players are the other way around. They can't stand pvp and
all they wanna do is make isk *cough* ebay *cough*.

And then we have CCP, the makers and the destroyers of this world.

They brought us the dreads, the carriers, the moms and the titans.
But what they didn't bring us, was the stability to effectivly
use them, and they also failed to imagine how we would use them.

No alliance will ever use a fullout capitalship assult without the
backup of a fleet. Much less field a titan without massive support.
But we all know what happens when 2 alliances meet up for a fistfight.

Hell.. a few days ago when i was jumping in an alliance operation,
we were sitting at gates for 30 minutes waiting for a system to load.

Where has EVE gone when it can't even handle 1 alliance moving around?

Keep that in mind, and then try to imagine how it would be like when
jumping into a fight, or even trying to fight in a system with 400 players.

It wasn't long ago when i was involved in a fight where we were not even 300
players in the system in total, and most of us could not even load.

Yet, CCP still insists on non needed game developement.

I haven't spoken to one person that is positive about this
station ambulation and you still insist on developing it instead
of taking all that manhours & funds and spend it on giving us some stability.

My last petition about the serverstability ended with the response
that in short said 'dont hold your breath'.



Can you imagine 300 ships and each one use 5 drones 300 x 5 = 1500 jeeeees and other game industry use heavy graphic games as max 64 players 32 + 32 ? i wondering who is causing this lag mmmmh wierd ?
]]> Sun, 17 Aug 2009 16:33:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8554536 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Tippia]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=14#400 Originally by: SiJira
no we dont want to walk in stations

i want to runYARRRR!!
Nice necro, idiot.
]]> Sun, 17 Aug 2009 15:02:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8554065 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by SiJira]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=14#399
i want to runYARRRR!!
Trashed sig, Shark was here]]> Sun, 17 Aug 2009 15:00:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8554064 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Solid Trust]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=14#398
Fixing bugs and balancing goes without saying. They already do it. As for lag, most people put themselves in that situation. You can pvp 23/7 and barely experience lag, however some people just have to be in the biggest blob possible.
]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 16:33:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8326260 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Creamster]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=14#397 ___________
In Petition we trust]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 16:22:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8326218 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Sakura Nihil]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=14#396 Originally by: J Valkor
Concentrating on only fixing bugs without adding new content is the surest way to kill an MMO.

Just as only adding new content without balancing and fixing it would kill it as well.

The trick imo is to find a fine balance between the two. CCP are trying to, and doing alright at the moment.



Click me! You know you want to...]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 16:20:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8326217 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by J Valkor]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=14#395 ]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 15:10:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8325857 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Armoured C]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=14#394

and i still cant believe this thread is still going on



you dont have to have ambulation on

the designers have already stated that you can keep thing just as they are



i would like to see a end to this thread =)

]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 14:02:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8325288 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by MotherMoon]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=14#393 Originally by: Alpha Prime

Originally by: Nitemare111

Fix for lag = Easy. Put a maximum cap of 100 ships per Alliance per fleet per system. Period. No more. Got 300 ships ready to go? 3 fleets. 3 systems. Tough shit.


Yes please, implement this!.


this just in, 10 new alliances all named goon______ have poped up today.

]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 13:38:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8325194 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by MotherMoon]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=14#392 Quote:
I wasn't speaking of dual cores, but dual processor boards. I ran 4 proc box server farms that were multithreading 2000-2001, it's not something new (it wasn't cheap however, the entire farm cost us $150,000). Dual core and Quad core processors are new, yes, but that's not what I was talking about.

At any rate Moon, they obviously weren't thinking future wise at all. Even if it were just 2 threads they'd be boatloads ahead, but I guess that's what happens when you let software "engineers" program.


ahhhh well now I feel like an idiot :P

good point they may of been thinking small server wise, but as far as home goes you have to admit the front side bus speed would not of allowed for very good multithreaded programs.

Also I think the biggest issue is the fact that they went with (brain fart) code instead of something more flexible.

]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 13:36:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8325193 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Tarminic]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=14#391 Originally by: Christari Zuborov
stuff

I wasn't suggesting that they didn't exist at the time, I was suggesting at the time single-core processors were still expanding in functionality in accordance with Moore's law, and CCP programmed under the assumption that they would continue to do so. Razz

Originally by: Alpha Prime

Originally by: Nitemare111

Fix for lag = Easy. Put a maximum cap of 100 ships per Alliance per fleet per system. Period. No more. Got 300 ships ready to go? 3 fleets. 3 systems. Tough shit.


Yes please, implement this!.

I hope you're trolling.
----------------
Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.83 (Updated 7/3)]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 13:19:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8325192 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Jim McGregor]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#390 Originally by: w0rmy
Originally by: Jim McGregor
Originally by: eve warrior
The man has a point. I for one totaly agree, ccp need to fix the game before adding more crap.

Eve warrior


They cant fix the lag.


Someone once told them you cant have 30,000 concurent users online either.



Because it was true back then.

Computers get twice as fast every 18 months or so (Moore's law), but this game will probably also have twice as many users in the same amount of time. Maybe more.

So fixing the lag is doubtful unless technology takes a giant leap forward, and even then, users will still be connected over the standard Internet.

---
Originally by: Roguehalo
Can you nano Titans?

]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 13:05:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8324969 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Deviana Sevidon]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#389
This is what EVE is and what it is about. It is a sandbox game. Yes shooting spaceships is an important feature, but this is not Counterstrike in space, where the only thing that matters is your killboard stats and your epeen.

I personally hope for one super game. Where people can play RTS in planetary battles, a first person shooter while boarding stations, develop planetary colonies, mine on planets or in space and of course course PvP in space.

EVE is not, yet, such a game but I think it is evolving and that is a good thing.

]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 12:48:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8324832 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Sergeant Spot]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#388 Originally by: Cailais

I personally don't believe CCP view EVE as a static game of just one type (e.g internet spaceships) - theyre busy creating a persistent Universe, one which will eventually consist of 'ships in space', planetary interaction (probably CIV style), and ambulation. A Universe of multiple 'game types' rather than a restrictive view.

And that's a good thing.

C.



Quoted For Truth

I've been saying that for years, along with a few other folks. Don't stress to much about the folks that can't seem to understand, they have really thick skulls.

Play nice while you butcher each other.
]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 11:07:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8324278 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Cailais]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#387
But here in lies the problem. The resources aren't equally applicable, specialists in one field can't be magically turned into specialists in another.

The next problem is that one given feature might be very appealing to a % of the player base; but not to others. Imagine if the new feature was "Mining". Players who enjoyed activities like mining and production would be very interested in seeing a 'Mining Expansion" - but you would still get players moaning that we didnt need it "our ships are produced automatically! fixing lag is more important! waaaaagh!!".

And yet the simple mechanism of mining has led onto new avenues of production, invention, salvaging and exploration, titans and outposts. I believe ambulation will be very much the same. Initially it will cater to only a small % of the population - but it will be the foundation of much wider changes.

Lets say we had a 'fixing lag expansion' - we'd have players whine because there was nothing 'new' to do and that it was only of any benefit to a very small group of alliance players who want 'massed fleet battles'.

I personally don't believe CCP view EVE as a static game of just one type (e.g internet spaceships) - theyre busy creating a persistent Universe, one which will eventually consist of 'ships in space', planetary interaction (probably CIV style), and ambulation. A Universe of multiple 'game types' rather than a restrictive view.

And that's a good thing.

C.




VITOC - Amarr Corp for Faction Warfare!]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 10:24:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8324027 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Shadowsword]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#386

The "CCP should fix bugs first!" argument of the anti-ambulation crowd doesn't hold much water, either. No one want a graphist or game designer to touch program code he doesn't know anything about.

Yet, sadly, there is one department in CCP that doesn't seem to be doing anything productive since months, and that's the design team. There's a score of things that plague the game since 6 months and more, from dysprosium shortage to speed-tanking, from assault frigs to docking, from pos warfare to missile damage mitigation, and so on... How many fixes for gameplay balance did we see in the last 6 monhts? Since the last year?

Rebalancing the reaction recipes so they require on average roughly equal quantities of the four R64 raws shouldn't take all that long, should it? It's basically half a day of work for one person in the design team, and at most a few days for one person in the dev team to change the code.


This inertia is just incomprehensible. The only things that might make sense out of it is if those in design team are always unable to reach agreement, or plain lazy, or if they have a vested interest in keeping things as they are. Or, they might fear being flamed so much that they're not able anymore to consider decisive changes.

In the military, soldiers are taught that undecisiveness will kill them more surely that a wrong decision. I hope for the sake of a game I like the lesson isn't lost on you, either...
------------------------------------------
]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 09:05:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8323753 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by xibet]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#385 Originally by: kessah
Originally by: CCP Eris Discordia
Originally by: Sergeant Spot


It will be an entirely new aspect of the game, ripe for developement and expansion.

DEPTH makes for a good game


You get a cookie for getting it.

We won't release Ambulation completely empty of features and things to do, but they may not be be your cup of tea. We will however continue to develop and expand Ambulation once it hits.


Cant say i liked the way you put that across. Makes it sound you know whats best for the end user tbh. You may think it looks cool so you might think the user will. TBH will prolly will, but like most good looking things they fall in time to function.

CCP maybe the music makers, but we make the game what it is, we play the intrument.

What im saying (like with your lovly zoom animation) is its a waste of time. Now im not saying my experience shawdows CCP's in terms of end user experience, but i play games, i play eve & for a long time and i know from my perspective theres ALOT more balancing, far more important than a 3d avatar walking around.


What, in god's name, are you stammering on about? You quote a thread, say you don't like how the point has been put across and then roll your head over the keyboard in response Crying or Very sad
]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 08:15:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8323535 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by AltBier]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#384 Originally by: Christari Zuborov
People should just stop posting when they don't have a clue, rather than continuing on trying to drill themselves out of the hole their in. Dual processor servers have been around since 1998, a full 5 years before EvE entered beta - a lifetime in MMOs.

You will notice that the copyright for EVE starts at 1997. So that might be one reason why the design of the software would not have taken dual processor servers into account.
Far more important though is the algorithmic problem involved in many-to-many relationships being computed in more than one thread.
]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 08:08:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8323534 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by kessah]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#383 Originally by: CCP Eris Discordia
Originally by: Sergeant Spot


It will be an entirely new aspect of the game, ripe for developement and expansion.

DEPTH makes for a good game


You get a cookie for getting it.

We won't release Ambulation completely empty of features and things to do, but they may not be be your cup of tea. We will however continue to develop and expand Ambulation once it hits.


Cant say i liked the way you put that across. Makes it sound you know whats best for the end user tbh. You may think it looks cool so you might think the user will. TBH will prolly will, but like most good looking things they fall in time to function.

CCP maybe the music makers, but we make the game what it is, we play the intrument.

What im saying (like with your lovly zoom animation) is its a waste of time. Now im not saying my experience shawdows CCP's in terms of end user experience, but i play games, i play eve & for a long time and i know from my perspective theres ALOT more balancing, far more important than a 3d avatar walking around.




]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 07:42:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8323369 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Garia666]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#382 If walking in stations give a bigger load on the servers then it sux ..

It should be aditional update not one which needed to play eve..
Which as far as i know is..

Anyway time will tell.. its not like CCP wil ever listen to its members . like in the good old days ;)


www.garia.net]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 07:28:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8323368 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Lazuran]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#381 Originally by: CCP Eris Discordia
Originally by: Sergeant Spot


It will be an entirely new aspect of the game, ripe for developement and expansion.

DEPTH makes for a good game


You get a cookie for getting it.

We won't release Ambulation completely empty of features and things to do, but they may not be be your cup of tea. We will however continue to develop and expand Ambulation once it hits.


Wohoo, we will get NPCs in stations with question marks hovering over their heads who give out FedEx quests. ;-P

]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 07:18:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8323279 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Guillight BLue]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#380 Edited by: Guillight BLue on 18/07/2008 06:39:20
Originally by: Karlemgne
Originally by: Xaen
Originally by: Danton Marcellus
It has to do with EVE becoming what the devs can and will do with it and maybe a little influenced by their customers sane arguments. Not the 'I wants MOAR kittens with pew pew oh noes !!!111eleventy1 some1 is taking our shit!!! IT'S CAPS OBEY ME!' mindlocked blob of simpletons think EVE should be.
It's generally nothing like that. Most of us who don't give a crap about ambulation want broken things fixed. We don't want more stuff. Just working stuff.


See my prievious post on this issue. I used to work in the video game industry, on an MMO that I won't name. When I left said company, said MMO had 40,000 known issues in the bug tracking database. If the company I worked for simply stopped adding new content, and "fixed" every bug in the game, it would have taken at least two years.

In eve that would mean no new content, no new ships, no new missions, no game balancing issues (2mwds per ship anyone) and a dead game.

MMOs don't work like that. There is a conscious effort to fix critical errors and gameplay issues, but fixing everything would just be dumb and kill your game and, most likely, your company.

-K


Finally someone who knows what he is talking about! Well Said Karlemgne.

Always funny to see that people completely ignore 'truth' posts like this for their own convenience, so they can continue their pointless argueing ugh

And thanks Eris Discordia for keep updating us and ignoring all the whiners here! Twisted Evil

They just don't get it and probably never will. They just hypocritical and living in total denial with themselves, as the moment Ambulation hits, they are the first to play with the new awesome character customisation and dock their ship at the nearestby station! Rolling Eyes

Cheers
]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 06:39:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8323135 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Alpha Prime]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#379
Originally by: Nitemare111

Fix for lag = Easy. Put a maximum cap of 100 ships per Alliance per fleet per system. Period. No more. Got 300 ships ready to go? 3 fleets. 3 systems. Tough shit.


Yes please, implement this!.


There is no price on true lojalty
]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 05:29:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8322933 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Darkeen]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#378 Originally by: Doc Fury
Edited by: Doc Fury on 18/07/2008 03:49:50
Our subscriptions are presently paying for development of a new game most of us won't likely ever play, and worse yet, we will have to pay to beta test this new distract-u-lation crap while bugs and unfinished features in the game we actually DO consent to pay for, remain unresolved.

Do you get it yet? What people are *****ing about is that EVE subscription revenues are not presently going to further EVE development as the existing subscribers expect, and said revenues are being diverted to this sucky vampire crap that CCP is disguising as an "EVE expansion", which in itself is just a huge beta test for said vampire game suckyness..

If buying-out WhiteWolf wasn't such a great immediate investment, why the frack should EVE-ONLINE subscribers have to pay for that mistake?


Strange, I thought we were paying to play Eve a space MMO that exists now, not some future Vaporware game that may never eventuate.

If CCP want to develop a game and test it on THEIR servers in THEIR environments, then thats their business.

Besides which, all this is purely speculation. Do you see ANY CCP mod's saying this is WILL happen? No. So it is just a "I want this" list..... much like the "I want a skill trainer so I can Isk farm" threads that are here about.
Regards,

Jason Brisbane
]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 05:24:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8322864 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Pithecanthropus]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#377
Now you trying to fight up north to clear your boredom and realizing you're not all that powerful. Just a bunch of carebears bringing the lag, and then complaining about it. Hypocrites.


---------------------------------
Pithecanthropus erectus, a name derived from Greek and Latin roots meaning upright ape-man.]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 04:38:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8322729 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by w0rmy]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#376 Originally by: Jim McGregor
Originally by: eve warrior
The man has a point. I for one totaly agree, ccp need to fix the game before adding more crap.

Eve warrior


They cant fix the lag.


Someone once told them you cant have 30,000 concurent users online either.


Originally by: CCP Oveur
I'm very sorry w0rmy, I beg your forgiveness.

Originally by: Dianabolic
I was never sworn to secrecy, w0rmy, sorry to dissappoint you.

]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 03:53:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8322594 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Scoobie Snacks]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#375 Alliance warfare, prime example of the broken game. 250 vs 250 anyone?
Multiple carrier deployment of fighters in a capital ship battle, prime example of the broken game. I warped to the safe pos 10 minutes ago - what do you mean I am still at the hostile pos!

Oh cool, soon we can hang out in a station and blow kisses at one another while waiting out the lag storm that hits active nodes.

Me and my three accounts just left alliance warfare and missions all together. Not much left of the game to play except being a pirate in low sec. - only way I can enjoy my internet spaceship without lag death.

CCP Devs got their heads in the sand
]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 03:38:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8322556 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Gamer4liff]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#374 Originally by: Lui Kai
Originally by: eliminator2

sorry for not been an ultra nerd and having learning difficulties but every1's point of view counts on such things ccp do i am just sayin not to get rid of the idea but to put it a side and to fix the current lag wether the new idea causes more lag wich it might or might not but id say fix the problems we have now instead of making that first and proberbly sayin DT EXTENDED 1 HOUR FOR THE NEW RELEASE few mins later DT DELAYED 1 HOUR MORE THAN WAS EXPECTED 2 hours later DT WILL BE UP IN 3 DAYS


I take it, then, that English is your primary language, and you're in some way functionally ******ed, in which case my treatment of your posts is no less valid.

I really don't know smaller words to try and get this across to you.

You have:

1. Adding ambulation.

and:

2. Fixing lag.


Consider these like being:

1. Eating a cheeseburger.

and

2. Thinking about trees.


The two actions have no effect on one another. Doing one does not, in any way, attract or detract from the other. They are not, in any possible combination, exclusive to each other.

I personally don't give a toss about ambulation. I personally would like lag to be fixed. But stopping ambulation in no way furthers my desire to see lag fixed.


I know this was back on page 3 but this is honestly the funniest post I have ever read on these forums. Now I have to wonder how much time people spend thinking about trees.

And honestly, I don't get this whole "All veterens hate chance" routine some of the people in this thread are pulling. I've been playing since feb. 04 and I'm not automatically hating every move CCP makes. Honestly, ambulation is a needed feature to expand the depth of interaction with the game world, in a new direction.
]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 03:27:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8322555 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Beltantis Torrence]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#373 Originally by: Mothermoon

oh lok in 1998 the top of line processor was a single core .3 ghz processor.


Long before dual core and quad core processors there were systems with dual, quad, or up to 16 processors in them. Multi-processor systems have existed since the 70's. Python is much newer than the concept of multithreading and multiple core systems. I hate to say it but all these problems are things that credit card/ATM systems solved like 30 years ago.

Anyway, my last post on this particular subject.
]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 02:54:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8322412 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by CCP Eris Discordia]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#372 Originally by: Sergeant Spot


It will be an entirely new aspect of the game, ripe for developement and expansion.

DEPTH makes for a good game


You get a cookie for getting it.

We won't release Ambulation completely empty of features and things to do, but they may not be be your cup of tea. We will however continue to develop and expand Ambulation once it hits.



Pink Dread has been hijacked


]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 02:42:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8322355 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Christari Zuborov]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#371 Originally by: MotherMoon

all that said yes lots of people have brought up great points in this thread, and hopefully the guys making the code will get mulitple core support soon or
god forbid rewrite the code in CC++. which would create 100,000 bugs and pure hell for a few months but might be needed if tech keeps growing.

However I never shot down those posts or ideas just yours, and your sad atemp to think that any game producer would think 8 years ahead and make their game support duo core computers.


On top of all of that those dual processor compters were not able to use both cores to run one program until 2004/2005. They were made to run more than one program each on one core for faster speed, but once CPUS reached higher speeds such as 2004 with the qst line of P4 processors there was no need. thus they started thinking... yeah why not have programs that span two cpus? well that would be dumb two cpus is hard to make any faster due to communication speed and the transfer in which the two cores would talk to each other. But then the pieces got smaller and one day, BAM! they could shove two cores into one and the duo line was born.
the industry will slowly adopt multiple core programs but most likely most games wil still be single core while using the newer cpus to allow games to run alone with their own cpu like a console allows for.


I wasn't speaking of dual cores, but dual processor boards. I ran 4 proc box server farms that were multithreading 2000-2001, it's not something new. Dual core and Quad core processors are new, yes, but even kind of "cheats" as you split the resources across the same die.

At any rate Moon, they obviously weren't thinking future wise at all. Even if it were just 2 threads they'd be boatloads ahead, but I guess that's what happens when you let software "engineers" program.




]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 02:36:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8322310 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Doc Fury]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#370 Originally by: Synapse Archae


The whole: "DEVS SHOULD BE FIXING BUGS NOT ADDING AMBULATION, OMFG" whine is a complete misunderstanding of what's going on, and it helps nobody.


No misunderstanding here at all:

Our subscriptions are presently paying for development of a new game most of us won't likely ever play, and worse yet, we will have to pay to beta test this new distract-u-lation crap while bugs and unfinished features in the game we actually DO pay for, remain unresolved.

Do you get it yet? What people are *****ing about is that EVE subscription revenues are not presently going to further EVE development, and are being diverted to this sucky vampire crap that CCP is disguising as an an "EVE expansion", that is actually only huge beta test for said vampire suckyness..


If buying-out WhiteWolf wasn't such a great immediate investment, why the frack should EVE-ONLINE subscribers have to pay for that mistake?





The beginning was the end (of everything)
The Ape regards his tail, (he's stuck on it)
Repeats until he fails..half a goon and half a god.. a man's not made of steel...
]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 02:33:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8322309 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by MotherMoon]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#369 Edited by: MotherMoon on 18/07/2008 02:13:24
Edited by: MotherMoon on 18/07/2008 02:09:52
Originally by: Christari Zuborov
Edited by: Christari Zuborov on 18/07/2008 02:04:20
Quote:
Aug. 24, 1998--Intel Corporation today introduced its fastest processor ever for mainstream Performance PCs, entry-level servers and workstations, and two new basic PC processors that offer Intel(R) quality and dependability at a great value.

The new Pentium(R) II processor 450 MHz provides the highest levels of computing performance for a wide range of productivity and entertainment applications, while the Intel(R) Celeron(TM) processors 333 MHz and 300A MHz enable reliable Basic PC systems on which to run today's common PC programs. These processors complete Intel's 1998 desktop processor line up.


oh lok in 1998 the top of line processor was a single core .3 ghz processor.


That's a Pentium II... Not the dual processor line, which was the Pentium Pro, and just a short 2 years later they have 4 processor board offered with Xeons - three years before EvE went beta. Got something else while you're behind? Multiprocessor code has been written LONG before x86 class machines even entered your vocabulary.

Some of the people in this thread have raised a valid point, don't let your fanboi n3rd rage blind you when it's true.



P pro 1998
Produced: November 1, 1995
Manufacturer: Intel
Max CPU clock: 150 MHz to 200 MHz
FSB speeds: 60 MHz to 66 MHz
Min feature size: 0.35 m to 0.50 m
Instruction set: x86
Microarchitecture: P6
Cores: 1
Socket: Socket 8

It was however the 1st duo cache CPU, is that what your getting confused with? duo cpu did not come untill much later. CPU cluster tech for super computers came out in 1998 as well meaning you could finally use 2 CPUs, these however where not duo core but infact two Cpus on the same motherboard, only used in supercompters of the day, this includes the eve cluster.

Only very resently have duo CPU become a reality.

don't post what you know nothing about jezz, that's like my friend who thinks his new mac has an 8 core CPU, NO! it has 2 4 quad cpu you idiot! ARGH.

]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 02:10:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8322251 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Christari Zuborov]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#368 Quote:
Aug. 24, 1998--Intel Corporation today introduced its fastest processor ever for mainstream Performance PCs, entry-level servers and workstations, and two new basic PC processors that offer Intel(R) quality and dependability at a great value.

The new Pentium(R) II processor 450 MHz provides the highest levels of computing performance for a wide range of productivity and entertainment applications, while the Intel(R) Celeron(TM) processors 333 MHz and 300A MHz enable reliable Basic PC systems on which to run today's common PC programs. These processors complete Intel's 1998 desktop processor line up.


oh lok in 1998 the top of line processor was a single core .3 ghz processor.


That's a Pentium II... Not the dual processor line, which was the Pentium Pro, and just a short 2 years later they have 4 processor board offered with Xeons - three years before EvE went beta. Got something else while you're behind? Multiprocessor code has been written LONG before x86 class machines even entered your vocabulary.











]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 01:46:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8322173 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by MotherMoon]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#367 Edited by: MotherMoon on 18/07/2008 00:56:10
Originally by: Christari Zuborov
Edited by: Christari Zuborov on 18/07/2008 00:48:23
Originally by: Tarminic


I wouldn't call it badly written. It's single threaded, yes, which is one of the primary factors limiting its scalability at the moment. However, when it was written servers with multiple processors weren't common and single-core processors were improving in accordance with Moore's law. CCP lost by gambling on single-core systems, but they didn't have much reason to believe differently at the time.




People should just stop posting when they don't have a clue,



yeah, people like you.

Quote:
Aug. 24, 1998--Intel Corporation today introduced its fastest processor ever for mainstream Performance PCs, entry-level servers and workstations, and two new basic PC processors that offer Intel(R) quality and dependability at a great value.

The new Pentium(R) II processor 450 MHz provides the highest levels of computing performance for a wide range of productivity and entertainment applications, while the Intel(R) Celeron(TM) processors 333 MHz and 300A MHz enable reliable Basic PC systems on which to run today's common PC programs. These processors complete Intel's 1998 desktop processor line up.


oh lok in 1998 the top of line processor was a single core .3 ghz processor.

]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 00:52:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8321948 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Karlemgne]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#366 Originally by: Aaron
i havent read all of the posts in the topic so im just gonna throw this in there,

im comming from a technical/database programmer background and i know a bit about how software interacts with hardware to give top performance. Ive always said eve was way ahead of its time in what ccp are trying to achieve. I think that each system in eve uses a pre-set amount of server resources, when there are large super battles perhaps the servers need to acknowlege this and divert more resources to the systems with battles.

CCP must be able to accomadate its paying subscribers. if we want 500 vs 500 battles then we should get exactly that. If the problem is beyond your control, such as internet issues then fair enuff. but if the problem is due to design flaws or hardware incompatence then the original post is right in saying that game development should be put on hold, and lots of resources pumped into finding out why theres lag in fleet battles.

CCP you must remember one important factor that we are your paying customers, and deserve lots of respect for that. I know lots of us arent satisfied with excuses for lag, Has lag been investigated to the fullest extent? Is there any solution for lag that your working on? I just think u need to engage the original post in a more respectful manner and level with him.

Dont get me wrong im looking forward to the expansions, however from a business point of view are you content with so many of "your customers" being unhappy?

you must understand its frustrating not knowing where somthing is going, or if it is even gonna get investigated properly or fixed.


I guess a further issue is how many subscribers are really engaging in these lagfest fleet battles. The numbers are rarely 500v500 in the first place, and when juxtaposed with the 200,000 subscribers, even then its a small percentage of the player base effected.

So the question becomes, why should CCP halt new content development (or even slow it down since this is impossible) because 12% of the total player base lags during capital fleet blobs in 0.0. Especially considering that the "lag" is very likely unfixable because of hardware issues?

-Karlemgne
]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 00:50:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8321947 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Christari Zuborov]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#365 Edited by: Christari Zuborov on 18/07/2008 00:48:23
Originally by: Tarminic


I wouldn't call it badly written. It's single threaded, yes, which is one of the primary factors limiting its scalability at the moment. However, when it was written servers with multiple processors weren't common and single-core processors were improving in accordance with Moore's law. CCP lost by gambling on single-core systems, but they didn't have much reason to believe differently at the time.




People should just stop posting when they don't have a clue, rather than continuing on trying to drill themselves out of the hole their in. Dual processor servers have been around since 1998, a full 5 years before EvE entered beta - a lifetime in MMOs.






]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 00:47:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8321946 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by MotherMoon]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#364 Originally by: R3dSh1ft
This is the worst thread I've ever read on here, and that's saying a lot.


more than the raven set up thread? nooo I can't agree with you on this note :P

]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 00:45:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8321895 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Synapse Archae]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#363
Walking in stations is being built for CCP's other game based on vampire: the masquerade. They were building an avatar based engine anyway, and thought EVE would make a nice testbed for that engine before it gets filled with pearly white teeth and high-poly wooden stake models.

The whole: "DEVS SHOULD BE FIXING BUGS NOT ADDING AMBULATION, OMFG" whine is a complete misunderstanding of what's going on, and it helps nobody.

We can either get avatars for free as part of the process, or those same devs can go build something without being part of eve, but it's going to be built anyway, and that Dev time will never be put to Eve bugs.
- - -
Originally by: CCP Garthagk
While these forums may not give you everything that you want, they will usually let you post.
]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 00:44:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8321894 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Karlemgne]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#362 Originally by: Xaen
Originally by: Danton Marcellus
It has to do with EVE becoming what the devs can and will do with it and maybe a little influenced by their customers sane arguments. Not the 'I wants MOAR kittens with pew pew oh noes !!!111eleventy1 some1 is taking our shit!!! IT'S CAPS OBEY ME!' mindlocked blob of simpletons think EVE should be.
It's generally nothing like that. Most of us who don't give a crap about ambulation want broken things fixed. We don't want more stuff. Just working stuff.


See my prievious post on this issue. I used to work in the video game industry, on an MMO that I won't name. When I left said company, said MMO had 40,000 known issues in the bug tracking database. If the company I worked for simply stopped adding new content, and "fixed" every bug in the game, it would have taken at least two years.

In eve that would mean no new content, no new ships, no new missions, no game balancing issues (2mwds per ship anyone) and a dead game.

MMOs don't work like that. There is a conscious effort to fix critical errors and gameplay issues, but fixing everything would just be dumb and kill your game and, most likely, your company.

-K
]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 00:42:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8321893 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Karlemgne]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=13#361 Originally by: Kyra Felann
Originally by: Karlemgne
Number two, BoB isn't living up to that slanderous title BoD. If you were a dev, or knew a dev, you'd realize how stupid people are when they say stuff like "fix the game before you add new content!!!" If CCP were to fix all of the known issues (probably numbering anywere from 20 thousand to 40 thousand) you'd never see new content--it would take years to "fix" all the bugs.


Not to mention that artists, modelers, writers, etc, don't fix bugs. They create new content. Not everyone that works for a game company is a programmer.


You are absolutely correct. My apologies to the artists out there who work for game companies. Although I would like to point out that video game development, as a whole, is a pretty complex process. Most game "designers" don't know any code, and not all bugs require a coder to fix. I am sure there are many designers and artists out there assigned to fixing game play and art asset issues.

Cheers,

-Karlemgne
]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2009 00:37:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8321892 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Poast Warrior]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#360
That being said, It'll be really neat to walk around and do things in station.

For like 15 minutes.

I also agree with what someone above said; people will have less of a reason to undock, which = less pew pew, which is bad.


]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 23:29:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8321579 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by P'uck]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#359
16vs16 in the first few versions of Operation flashpoint? yeah right, no wai that would work without half the team running around with at least half a sec lagging behind.

"boohoo i lagged out when there was 400 people on grid"

KIDS THESE DAYS HAVE IT TO GOOD!
We had to finish games that had "easy modes" that make halo 3 on legendary look like a friggin walk in the park! we had to fumble our way to victory with d-pads that left painful marks on your thumbs, because back then, you know, japan obviously wasnt able to produce responsive microswitches and soft springs! I STILL HAVE THOSE TINY ARROWS VISIBLE ON MY THUMBS.

You had to play 25 hours straight, in a single session, if you wanted to finish that game. There weren't any fancy pantsy save slots for sissies. We kept going til the end and we LIKED it.

There was a time when the idea of "multiplayer" just meant the game would issue you two seperate highscore counters and force you to take turns while playing, minimizing the chance that children kill each other over the controller.

So let me say it again; KIDS THESE DAYS Laughing
]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 23:15:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8321520 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Macmuelli]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#358
And if the base is perfect. U will be open for at least (perhaps) one day pve/ pvp on stations.
Then it could be ready for Planet interaction.
This should be the way and meaning of Walking in station.

The foundation stone.


my personal minds

breg

mac



HStt de MSkelbrger ierst n Menschen in sin Haart inschlottn, denn kann diese Mensch sich opn Meckelbrger full und gonz verlatten."

evefan since 2003]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 22:23:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8321237 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Dzajic]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#357 ]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 21:52:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8321073 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Skipdog]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#356
I must admit, I am a bit dismayed that my subscription money is going into something like this. You can't tell me "oh they are a different team" because it still means that they are using my money to do this and that money could have gone towards much better game improvements.
]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 21:15:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8321005 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Tarminic]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#355 Originally by: Beltantis Torrence
So you're arguing a straw man argument? Who here is suggesting CCP upgrade to the latest Dell?

I have to admit that I have no idea what you're talking about.
----------------
Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.83 (Updated 7/3)]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 20:55:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8320729 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Sha Dar]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#354
The OP doesn't understand the wonderful opportunity ccp is giving us. We get the honour of paying to be beta testers for their new MMO

/Sarcasm
-
]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 20:53:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8320728 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Guillight BLue]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#353 Edited by: Guillight BLue on 17/07/2008 20:30:32
Originally by: Beltantis Torrence

When the problem becomes my CPU being max'd out then it'll be a client side issue. That's not the case at all. Another straw man argument.


LOL! You seriously want me to comment on this silly counter-argument? Pretty impressive you can run EVE Online on your CPU only.

Enough said.
]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 20:30:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8320636 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Chinger]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#352 ]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 20:29:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8320635 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Beltantis Torrence]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#351 Originally by: Malcanis

Flaming people for something they did not actually say makes one look smart.

You look like a genius right now.


You said its "technical limitations" and that its not an issue of money or priority. So then, rather than us putting words in your mouth, why don't you explain exactly what the technical limitation is that prevents a server from handling requests from 100-1000 ships?

Exactly what's a reasonable modern day figure for requests per second for a "Massive" online game?
]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 20:27:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8320634 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Beltantis Torrence]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#350 Originally by: Guillight BLue
Edited by: Guillight BLue on 17/07/2008 17:39:50
Originally by: Tarminic
Originally by: Lazuran
Originally by: Tarminic
Much computing ignorance in this thread.

To summarize:
-There is no civilian server that can handle the massive battles in EVE without significant amounts of lag



Where do you "summarize" this nonsense from? CCP's server code is just clunky old single-threaded Python code, that's the whole problem at hand. Nowdays you can get "civilian" servers with 16 cores everywhere and CCP's crummy code can't benefit from it.

Don't make stupid broad statements like "there is no ..." when in fact the problem is "CCP's code is currently not able to ...".

Did you notice anywhere in that summary that I said that it's not possible?

I said, specifically, "There is no civilian server that can handle the massive battles in EVE without significant amounts of lag." I never said why that's the case, because it was a summary.

Yes, most of the reason is because CCP can't multithread their server code, and won't be able to for some time (according to one of the devs). I wasn't defending CCP or making excuses for them.

My statement still stands. Take EVE's software architecture and put it on any civilian server in the world and it won't fare any better.


Just leave it Tarminic. Lazuran is just a silly little troll only reading one line of your and my posts, missinterpret them and then answers with bull, because he has no clue whatsoever what he's talking about.

One last statement towards Lazuran, as Im done with him:

Even if CCP rewrites to code (wich they are doing to my knowledge) so they can fully utilize multicore CPU's, it will still NOT be the solution to make it possible on the client side!

And I did NOT come up with the 500 versus 500 battles, but the OP did and many other ignorant people in this topic, demanding it from CCP, while having no clue that with todays technology (Again from both Server side AS client side!!) it's just NOT possible without LAG!

It's NOT only about graphics, it's all the complex processing that takes place in such battles and your client that constantly needs to be updated with just TOO much data! Not to mention all the info in your UI overview!

Cheers


When the problem becomes my CPU being max'd out then it'll be a client side issue. That's not the case at all. Another straw man argument.
]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 20:24:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8320582 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Beltantis Torrence]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#349 Originally by: Tarminic
Originally by: Lazuran
Originally by: Tarminic
Much computing ignorance in this thread.

To summarize:
-There is no civilian server that can handle the massive battles in EVE without significant amounts of lag



Where do you "summarize" this nonsense from? CCP's server code is just clunky old single-threaded Python code, that's the whole problem at hand. Nowdays you can get "civilian" servers with 16 cores everywhere and CCP's crummy code can't benefit from it.

Don't make stupid broad statements like "there is no ..." when in fact the problem is "CCP's code is currently not able to ...".

Did you notice anywhere in that summary that I said that it's not possible?

I said, specifically, "There is no civilian server that can handle the massive battles in EVE without significant amounts of lag." I never said why that's the case, because it was a summary.

Yes, most of the reason is because CCP can't multithread their server code, and won't be able to for some time (according to one of the devs). I wasn't defending CCP or making excuses for them.

My statement still stands. Take EVE's software architecture and put it on any civilian server in the world and it won't fare any better.


So you're arguing a straw man argument? Who here is suggesting CCP upgrade to the latest Dell?
]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 20:22:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8320581 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by doichin]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#348 Originally by: Guillight BLue

But what YOU ALL PEOPLE fail misserably at and DO NOT realise is that there isn't any PC yet you can install at home that can draw a 1000 ships, with all its Trinity glory, lightning effects and particle effects WITHOUT lagging the hell out of your computer!


Please don't confuse the issue. We are talking about 200 v 200 battles lagging due to server lag. Anyone in a fleet battle will have all effects turned off, be zoomed all the way out with no brackets. Even a 3 year old machine will manage 100 fps like this as there is nothing to draw.

It still takes 2 minutes to activate a module, or select something in the overview though - because it is the server lagging, nothing to do with your PC or network link.
]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 20:16:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8320580 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Xaen]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#347 Originally by: Malcanis
Some players want massive battles. Others hugely prefer engagements of around 5-12 per side. The skills and fittings of individual players are of diminishing importance as the size of their fleet increases. At the extreme, the only skill really involved in a 500vs500 is that of the 2 FCs. The other 998 guys are little more spectators.

10vs10 EvE works fine. So although I'd be very happy if CCP were to upgrade the doohickys widgets and hamsters required to enable those, it's not my highest priority.

And as noted above, I'm in the majority in this. Just a thought.
It's not my highest priority either. But it's more important to me than farting around in stations is.
-
Support fixing the UI|Suggest Jita fixes|Compact logs]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 20:03:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8320449 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Stepford Wife]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#346 ]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 20:00:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8320448 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Malcanis]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#345 Originally by: Xaen
Originally by: Nitemare111
Lag = Not CCP's fault.
Only imbeciles ever say this.

If they designed a single shard system that was incapable of handling the numbers of players that can easily be found wanting to congregate, then it's their exclusively their failing.

Similarly brain dead arguments are trotted out whenever lag in jita is brought up. It's CCP that failed to provide a centralized market that could handle the volumes of players that would predictably and inevitably congregate in a single place to do business.

It's predictable, documented, human behavior that they failed to account for. Lag from too many people is the same damn thing.

It's not the players' fault for wanting what they were promised. A single shard sandbox with Massive battles. I've never been in a big battle that was exciting beyond not knowing that my ship is already dead and I don't know it yet due to lag.

It is a Massively Multiplayer Online Rolplaying Game isn't it? Well it is, if you throw out the massive part outside of Jita. Specific systems are on their own nodes beefy nodes, but if you're trying to have a massive fleet battle in a different system, you're SOL. The hardware isn't there, and the software is incapable of moving the battle to nodes that can handle the sudden huge load while the system is live. Such systems do exist, even outside the military. But Tranquility isn't on one of them.


Some players want massive battles. Others hugely prefer engagements of around 5-12 per side. The skills and fittings of individual players are of diminishing importance as the size of their fleet increases. At the extreme, the only skill really involved in a 500vs500 is that of the 2 FCs. The other 998 guys are little more spectators.

10vs10 EvE works fine. So although I'd be very happy if CCP were to upgrade the doohickys widgets and hamsters required to enable those, it's not my highest priority.

And as noted above, I'm in the majority in this. Just a thought.

CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 19:36:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8320269 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Tarminic]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#344 Originally by: Xaen
Originally by: Nitemare111
Lag = Not CCP's fault.
Only imbeciles ever say this.

If they designed a single shard system that was incapable of handling the numbers of players that can easily be found wanting to congregate, then it's their exclusively their failing.

Similarly brain dead arguments are trotted out whenever lag in jita is brought up. It's CCP that failed to provide a centralized market that could handle the volumes of players that would predictably and inevitably congregate in a single place to do business.

It's predictable, documented, human behavior that they failed to account for. Lag from too many people is the same damn thing.

It's not the players' fault for wanting what they were promised. A single shard sandbox with Massive battles. I've never been in a big battle that was exciting beyond not knowing that my ship is already dead and I don't know it yet due to lag.

It is a Massively Multiplayer Online Rolplaying Game isn't it? Well it is, if you throw out the massive part outside of Jita. Specific systems are on their own nodes beefy nodes, but if you're trying to have a massive fleet battle in a different system, you're SOL. The hardware isn't there, and the software is incapable of moving the battle to nodes that can handle the sudden huge load while the system is live. Such systems do exist, even outside the military. But Tranquility isn't on one of them.

Couldn't you trace all of that back to CCP not planning on using multi-core systems for their hardware? While it was a bad decision, I don't think it's reason to decry all of CCP as coding n00bz who are uninterested in fixing the game.
----------------
Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.83 (Updated 7/3)]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 19:35:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8320268 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Malcanis]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#343 Originally by: Surreptitious
Originally by: Malcanis
Edited by: Malcanis on 17/07/2008 13:24:02
Originally by: Aaron
i havent read all of the posts in the topic so im just gonna throw this in there,



Pity or you'd see that your post was neither original nor correct.

In short: wanting something won't make it happen. It's not a question of financial or programming resources, it's a question of technological limitations. The computing power required for large battles goes up roughly proportional to X! (that's factorial of X; X! = 1 x 2 x 3 x 4 ... x X).

CCP have improved a lot the number of ships which can participate in fleet actions, but as soon they increase the capability to n ships, players will bring n+m ships (m being enough to make everything grind to a blackscreen-infested slideshow). Until n total number of players in the game, lag will be at least a potential problem. In other words, there will always be lag.

Since lag is as much a social problem as a technological one, one way to mitigate it is to give players lots of other things to do than attend huge fleet battles....



Saying its technologically impossible is just ignorant.

Yes, you heard it here. It is literally impossible to get 100 objects on a screen interacting with 100 other objects on the screen. Rolling Eyes

Drink more of the CCP cool-aid you lame-o fanboy.

Syrup


Flaming people for something they did not actually say makes one look smart.

You look like a genius right now.

CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 19:32:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8320267 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by masumi vega]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#342 ]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 19:27:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8320266 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Xaen]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#341 Originally by: Nitemare111
Lag = Not CCP's fault.
Only imbeciles ever say this.

If they designed a single shard system that was incapable of handling the numbers of players that can easily be found wanting to congregate, then it's their exclusively their failing.

Similarly brain dead arguments are trotted out whenever lag in jita is brought up. It's CCP that failed to provide a centralized market that could handle the volumes of players that would predictably and inevitably congregate in a single place to do business.

It's predictable, documented, human behavior that they failed to account for. Lag from too many people is the same damn thing.

It's not the players' fault for wanting what they were promised. A single shard sandbox with Massive battles. I've never been in a big battle that was exciting beyond not knowing that my ship is already dead and I don't know it yet due to lag.

It is a Massively Multiplayer Online Rolplaying Game isn't it? Well it is, if you throw out the massive part outside of Jita. Specific systems are on their own nodes beefy nodes, but if you're trying to have a massive fleet battle in a different system, you're SOL. The hardware isn't there, and the software is incapable of moving the battle to nodes that can handle the sudden huge load while the system is live. Such systems do exist, even outside the military. But Tranquility isn't on one of them.
-
Support fixing the UI|Suggest Jita fixes|Compact logs]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 19:17:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8320265 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Tarminic]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#340 Originally by: Lazuran
But the point is precisely that it's not the availability of "civilian servers" that causes these problems, but the badly written server-side code.

I wouldn't call it badly written. It's single threaded, yes, which is one of the primary factors limiting its scalability at the moment. However, when it was written servers with multiple processors weren't common and single-core processors were improving in accordance with Moore's law. CCP lost by gambling on single-core systems, but they didn't have much reason to believe differently at the time.

Quote:
You tried deliberately to make it sound like we're out of luck because you can't get servers that would make EVE work well. But you can get them easily if CCP invests enough effort into fixing the code. Noone is asking specifically for better hardware, but for a focused effort to fix the lag problems and that means mainly to fix the software.

Which they are doing. Except that takes time, effort, and money. There is no "quick fix" which people like you seem to suggest that CCP is intentionally ignoring.
----------------
Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.83 (Updated 7/3)]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 19:08:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8320165 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Aero Zolic]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#339
I agree that it's cool and all but stable and lower-lag server >>>> walking in stations and all that.
|| Gigabyte GA-P35C-DS3R | Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 @ 3.2GHz | 4x1GB A-Data EXTREME DDR2 800+ | BFG GeForce 8800GTS 512MB | WDC 500GB SATA-II | Windows Vista Business x64 SP1 | FSP BlueStorm II 500W ||]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 19:01:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8320103 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Lazuran]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#338 Originally by: Guillight BLue


And I did NOT come up with the 500 versus 500 battles, but the OP did and many other ignorant people in this topic, demanding it from CCP, while having no clue that with todays technology (Again from both Server side AS client side!!) it's just NOT possible without LAG!

It's NOT only about graphics, it's all the complex processing that takes place in such battles and your client that constantly needs to be updated with just TOO much data! Not to mention all the info in your UI overview!

Cheers


This clueless nonsense is easily contradicted by simply observing current fleet battles where 20% of the people can fight and the rest see nothing, without those 20% having a better PC or connection than the others.

It's a server-side problem, all clueless comments about the PC not being able to handle data yada yada can be ignored/ridiculed.

]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 18:33:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8319939 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Lazuran]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#337 Originally by: Tarminic

Did you notice anywhere in that summary that I said that it's not possible?

I said, specifically, "There is no civilian server that can handle the massive battles in EVE without significant amounts of lag." I never said why that's the case, because it was a summary.

Yes, most of the reason is because CCP can't multithread their server code, and won't be able to for some time (according to one of the devs). I wasn't defending CCP or making excuses for them.

My statement still stands. Take EVE's software architecture and put it on any civilian server in the world and it won't fare any better.


But the point is precisely that it's not the availability of "civilian servers" that causes these problems, but the badly written server-side code.

You tried deliberately to make it sound like we're out of luck because you can't get servers that would make EVE work well. But you can get them easily if CCP invests enough effort into fixing the code. Noone is asking specifically for better hardware, but for a focused effort to fix the lag problems and that means mainly to fix the software.

]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 18:29:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8319938 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Guillight BLue]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#336 Edited by: Guillight BLue on 17/07/2008 17:39:50
Originally by: Tarminic
Originally by: Lazuran
Originally by: Tarminic
Much computing ignorance in this thread.

To summarize:
-There is no civilian server that can handle the massive battles in EVE without significant amounts of lag



Where do you "summarize" this nonsense from? CCP's server code is just clunky old single-threaded Python code, that's the whole problem at hand. Nowdays you can get "civilian" servers with 16 cores everywhere and CCP's crummy code can't benefit from it.

Don't make stupid broad statements like "there is no ..." when in fact the problem is "CCP's code is currently not able to ...".

Did you notice anywhere in that summary that I said that it's not possible?

I said, specifically, "There is no civilian server that can handle the massive battles in EVE without significant amounts of lag." I never said why that's the case, because it was a summary.

Yes, most of the reason is because CCP can't multithread their server code, and won't be able to for some time (according to one of the devs). I wasn't defending CCP or making excuses for them.

My statement still stands. Take EVE's software architecture and put it on any civilian server in the world and it won't fare any better.


Just leave it Tarminic. Lazuran is just a silly little troll only reading one line of your and my posts, missinterpret them and then answers with bull, because he has no clue whatsoever what he's talking about.

One last statement towards Lazuran, as Im done with him:

Even if CCP rewrites to code (wich they are doing to my knowledge) so they can fully utilize multicore CPU's, it will still NOT be the solution to make it possible on the client side!

And I did NOT come up with the 500 versus 500 battles, but the OP did and many other ignorant people in this topic, demanding it from CCP, while having no clue that with todays technology (Again from both Server side AS client side!!) it's just NOT possible without LAG!

It's NOT only about graphics, it's all the complex processing that takes place in such battles and your client that constantly needs to be updated with just TOO much data! Not to mention all the info in your UI overview!

Cheers
]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 17:37:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8319633 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Tarminic]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#335 Originally by: Lazuran
Originally by: Tarminic
Much computing ignorance in this thread.

To summarize:
-There is no civilian server that can handle the massive battles in EVE without significant amounts of lag



Where do you "summarize" this nonsense from? CCP's server code is just clunky old single-threaded Python code, that's the whole problem at hand. Nowdays you can get "civilian" servers with 16 cores everywhere and CCP's crummy code can't benefit from it.

Don't make stupid broad statements like "there is no ..." when in fact the problem is "CCP's code is currently not able to ...".

Did you notice anywhere in that summary that I said that it's not possible?

I said, specifically, "There is no civilian server that can handle the massive battles in EVE without significant amounts of lag." I never said why that's the case, because it was a summary.

Yes, most of the reason is because CCP can't multithread their server code, and won't be able to for some time (according to one of the devs). I wasn't defending CCP or making excuses for them.

My statement still stands. Take EVE's software architecture and put it on any civilian server in the world and it won't fare any better.
----------------
Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.83 (Updated 7/3)]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 17:29:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8319577 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Lazuran]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#334 Originally by: Tarminic
Much computing ignorance in this thread.

To summarize:
-There is no civilian server that can handle the massive battles in EVE without significant amounts of lag



Where do you "summarize" this nonsense from? CCP's server code is just clunky old single-threaded Python code, that's the whole problem at hand. Nowdays you can get "civilian" servers with 16 cores everywhere and CCP's crummy code can't benefit from it.

Don't make stupid broad statements like "there is no ..." when in fact the problem is "CCP's code is currently not able to ...".




]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 17:22:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8319502 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Lazuran]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#333 Originally by: Guillight BLue


In EVE we are talking about 500 versus 500 ships in close up battle, with all the particals and effects spraying around!



I don't know what you are talking about, but RIGHT NOW in EVE you will not see 500 v 500 ships close up with "all the particals" (LOL). And there's no demand to do this and this isn't what causes the server lag currently.

Quote:

And distance blurring and various graphic scaling isn't gonna help in that as its already being done in EVE Online. So you fail on that too!


Make up your mind, either you need to see them with full details or you don't. Fact is, you don't and what the servers need to process has nothing to do with graphics. All the effects are client-side "particals".


Quote:

EDIT: And no I am not trolling, as I ACTUALLY DO work in the IT as Systems Engineer and ACTUALLY have a clue what todays AVAILABLE server technology is capable of and more important, what our PC clients at home CAN and CANNOT handle.


Well you are ACTUALLY clueless and clients are not the issue.


]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 17:19:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8319501 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Nitemare111]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#332
Lag = Not CCP's fault.

Fix for lag = Easy. Put a maximum cap of 100 ships per Alliance per fleet per system. Period. No more. Got 300 ships ready to go? 3 fleets. 3 systems. Tough shit.
------
"When in doubt, aim for the crotch."
"There's no problem that the application of suitable firepower cannot fix."
Originally by: A Belief
Nothing is yours until it's ISK in your wallet. So it goes.]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 17:05:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8319500 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Tarminic]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=12#331
To summarize:
-There is no civilian server that can handle the massive battles in EVE without significant amounts of lag
-Combat cannot be significantly optimized to reduce its complexity without fundamentally altering game mechanics
-CCP is rewriting their server architecture to allow handling of combat to be split across nodes, which it cannot currently do

Any questions?
----------------
Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.83 (Updated 7/3)]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 16:49:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8319499 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Jim McGregor]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=11#329 Edited by: Jim McGregor on 17/07/2008 16:35:14
Originally by: Bleeshtar

Flirt up your pod!

Razz


I love it how everybody looks like a photo model but is single... Laughing

The screenshot section is like Big Brother Cartoon style.

---
Originally by: Roguehalo
Can you nano Titans?

]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 16:35:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8319177 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Guillight BLue]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=11#330 Edited by: Guillight BLue on 17/07/2008 16:43:15
Edited by: Guillight BLue on 17/07/2008 16:37:42
Originally by: Lazuran
Originally by: Guillight BLue

But what YOU ALL PEOPLE fail misserably at and DO NOT realise is that there isn't any PC yet you can install at home that can draw a 1000 ships, with all its Trinity glory, lightning effects and particle effects WITHOUT lagging the hell out of your computer!


Noone is asking for EVE to do that. All current 3D games use simplified models for objects that are further away and in fleet battles in EVE all you will usually see is tiny dots with icons on top.

Really, the client-side graphics aren't the problem and if you had any kind of serious IT education, you wouldn't write something clueless like you just did.



Haha, well you clearly haven't! That's for sure. Dream on.

In EVE we are talking about 500 versus 500 ships in close up battle, with all the particals and effects spraying around!

That's not something you can dumb down to little dots on your screen! These 500 versus 500 still need to be processed. Or do you like being hit and blown up by invisible targets all the time, because of your oh so great IT education experience CCP won't need to show all 1000 ships on the screen nor update all of them in your overview??

And distance blurring and LOD scaling isn't gonna help in that! And btw. Ships are being scaled over distance in EVE Online already so you know.

Happy dreaming in your IT LaLaLa land.

Cheers
]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 16:35:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8319178 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Bleeshtar]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=11#328 Originally by: Lazuran
Originally by: Bleeshtar
Originally by: Alpha Prime
Edited by: Alpha Prime on 13/07/2008 13:11:04

Ever since we've heard & seen this, i have spoken to alot of
players concerning this waste of manhours gone into this
huge waste of effort.



Strangely enough ever since I started playing (at launch) there was an outcry by a large portion of the player base...

"Let us get out of our ships!"

Way I see it CCP is trying to cater to that large portion.

Carry on.


Next thing those people will ask is to get out of their clothes and do naughty things to each other, I tell you ...


Flirt up your pod!

Razz
]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 16:31:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8319176 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Crumplecorn]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=11#327 Edited by: Crumplecorn on 17/07/2008 16:31:39
Originally by: Surreptitious
Saying its technologically impossible is just ignorant.
Originally by: Beltantis Torrence
Its not technically impossible at all.


I find it amusing that these are both responses to a post which did not even contain the word 'impossible' (or a synonym thereof) and which was referring to the general problem of load increasing exponentially in n anyway, not the potential computing power of a modern server relative to the current size of the playerbase.



Originally by: Guillight BLue
But what YOU ALL PEOPLE fail misserably at and DO NOT realise is that there isn't any PC yet you can install at home that can draw a 1000 ships, with all its Trinity glory, lightning effects and particle effects WITHOUT lagging the hell out of your computer!
This amuses me more though, despite being obvioustroll.
-

DesuSigs]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 16:30:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8319175 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Lazuran]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=11#326 Originally by: Guillight BLue

But what YOU ALL PEOPLE fail misserably at and DO NOT realise is that there isn't any PC yet you can install at home that can draw a 1000 ships, with all its Trinity glory, lightning effects and particle effects WITHOUT lagging the hell out of your computer!


Noone is asking for EVE to do that. All current 3D games use simplified models for objects that are further away and in fleet battles in EVE all you will usually see is tiny dots with icons on top.

Really, the client-side graphics aren't the problem and if you had any kind of serious IT education, you wouldn't write something clueless like you just did.


]]> Thu, 17 Jul 2009 16:28:00 +0000 eve-search/guid/8319174 <![CDATA[Walking in Stations = CRAP & Not Wanted - by Guillight BLue]]> http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=821702&page=11#325 Edited by: Guillight BLue on 17/07/2008 16:30:26
Originally by: Surreptitious
Originally by: Malcanis
Edited by: Malcanis on 17/07/