Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 19 post(s) |
Rixx Javix
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
401
|
Posted - 2014.09.06 14:19:00 -
[1] - Quote
My own thoughts on the Event.
5,000 players in Nisuwa showed up to explode a rare Revenant Super-Carrier under increasingly difficult conditions. Were you there? What was your experience like? I'm starting this thread because Erlendur made me do eet.
Was this a CCP server test? Or was this a great time had by all?
Feedback, opinions, experiences, let 'em fly.
http://eveoganda.blogspot.com |
Akrasjel Lanate
Naquatech Conglomerate Naquatech Syndicate
1557
|
Posted - 2014.09.06 14:32:00 -
[2] - Quote
I was there, yet i should have not, knowing in the back of my mind what are max TiDi battles... i say never again after i do one... but this neveragain has to come and i will probalby go for another after some time.
PS. It was fun in the moment i crashed for some reson(with many other people from what i heard on comms) and i was like... "finaly i can go sleep". |
|
CCP Explorer
C C P C C P Alliance
2340
|
Posted - 2014.09.06 14:50:00 -
[3] - Quote
Rixx Javix wrote:My own thoughts on the Event.5,000 players in Nisuwa showed up to explode a rare Revenant Super-Carrier under increasingly difficult conditions. Were you there? What was your experience like? I'm starting this thread because Erlendur made me do eet. Was this a CCP server test? Or was this a great time had by all? Feedback, opinions, experiences, let 'em fly. For background then first reading https://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/what-a-hed-ache/ where CCP Veritas provided a comparison on the fight in HED-GP in Jan this year with the fight in 6VDT-H in Jul 2013 is very helpful. It establishes the terminology we use internally at CCP and a basis for a comparison to Nisuwa. The technical part at the end of https://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/the-battle-of-asakai-and-poinen-must-burn-by-the-numbers/ by CCP Masterplan is also relevant because like Asakai then Nisuwa happened in empire and not in 0.0.
All done reading? Excellent, let's continue.
Let's start with that whether a solarsystem is reinforced or not doesn't change the general progression of load and ultimately lag (when the load becomes too much), it only changes the scale at which it happens. The same applies to whether an event is in 0.0 or empire, it just changes the scale. The best-case scenario is reinforced in 0.0, worst-case is not reinforced in empire.
This event was in a reinforced node, the solarsystem was hosted next to Jita, so it was the best hardware experience; but it was in empire so Crime Watch was a part of load, monitoring the fight and calculating security status (but not dispatching CONCORD). For details on Crime Watch, please see the Asakai devblog. (We also saw load in other parts of the cluster, i.e., on other nodes than where Nisuwa was hosted, e.g., the Bounty Service spiked to 100% CPU load for a while during the fight.)
In terms of load there are 3 stages: Controlled CPU, 100% CPU but controlled Time Dilation, 100% CPU and 10% Time Dilation and Dogma Lateness setting in (see the HED-GP devblog for details on these terms).
Looking at the numbers this morning then the Dogma Lateness of Nisuwa (at 4920 pilots) was somewhat similar to HED-GP (at 4000 pilots)*. When we add the fact what Crime Watch was running in Nisuwa (empire) but not HED-GP (0.0) then performance per pilot was much better in Nisuwa than HED-GP. The end result was probably similar since there were approx. 25% more pilots in Nisuwa.
* These population numbers are from population recording at 20 minute intervals, we've yet to establish what the second-by-second peak was for Nisuwa. Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Senior Development Director | EVE Online // CCP Games | @erlendur |
|
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
140
|
Posted - 2014.09.06 15:07:00 -
[4] - Quote
I was there, it was manageable, but not necessarily fun
No FiBo helped a ton I think
I wish we would have camped the out gate and not bothered to even go in the system, I would have probably run out of ammo, as it was i entered system with FULL guns (20 rounds) locked the Revenant and shot it with one gun, when I left 4 hours later, it had 14 rounds in it, so I got off 5 shots in 4 hours |
Rixx Javix
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
402
|
Posted - 2014.09.06 15:08:00 -
[5] - Quote
Excellent, and I have read those reports believe it or not. So this begs the question, what are our options? Given the technical limitations on server load and the increasing amount of reporting needing to be done, crime-watch, drones, etc., what are legitimate options for massive fleet battles or events?
Is it time to consider a hard limit on per system player numbers? What else can be done? http://eveoganda.blogspot.com |
|
CCP Explorer
C C P C C P Alliance
2346
|
Posted - 2014.09.06 15:27:00 -
[6] - Quote
For those interested then Rixx and I have a discussion here https://twitter.com/RixxJavix/status/508243959676551168 (before this forum thread was posted) and here https://twitter.com/RixxJavix/status/508258640868802560 (after the thread was posted, use that one if you want to participate). Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Senior Development Director | EVE Online // CCP Games | @erlendur |
|
|
CCP Explorer
C C P C C P Alliance
2346
|
Posted - 2014.09.06 15:34:00 -
[7] - Quote
Rixx Javix wrote:Excellent, and I have read those reports believe it or not. So this begs the question, what are our options? Given the technical limitations on server load and the increasing amount of reporting needing to be done, crime-watch, drones, etc., what are legitimate options for massive fleet battles or events?
Is it time to consider a hard limit on per system player numbers? What else can be done?
PS: I'm no fan of limits and I would never recommend them. Perhaps this is just one of those things that has no real answer. At least, not yet. 5,000 ships, each with their own modules, guns, drones, effects, sec status, etc, etc. There is only so much computing power available. Hard population cap is not the answer; that will become a tactic where the cap will be used to lock people out and avoid a fight.
In terms of answers:
- More servers :) Just this week we were preparing RFPs for new hardware, to replace TQ.
- Team Gridlock is continuing on rewriting Dogma and on the Brain-in-a-Box project. There are also other things on the table such as drone-swarms where all drones act in a swarm like one drone, this would be similar to the grouped gun system. Given the O(n^2) nature of drones this would significantly reduce load in certain scenarios.
- The last part is more tricky and the one we would appreciate feedback: How can we spread large fights over multiple systems in such a manner that it's fun for everyone involved? Some sort of a simultaneous mega-objective across multiple systems but only when there are many involved so you could still have single-system fights depending on man-power (we don't want to require people to always have 3000+ pilot fleets). This happened in B-R since there were fights in the staging systems and Titans and fleets were intercepted en route to B-R.
Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Senior Development Director | EVE Online // CCP Games | @erlendur |
|
Talon Draygo
Capsuleer Outfitters Bad Intention
46
|
Posted - 2014.09.06 16:13:00 -
[8] - Quote
Well without a kill mail the whole thing was a complete waste of time in my opinion. |
MonkeyBusiness Thiesant
randomly named no tax corp v2
8
|
Posted - 2014.09.06 16:42:00 -
[9] - Quote
I'm sure it's all very impressive technically, but as a playing experience it's fairly horrible. Not trying to moan about this, that's just my genuine opinion.
When you have 5 minutes before the game responds to a warp command, and modules start doing random buggy things, that's way beyond any sort of reasonable limit. |
Sum Olgy
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
70
|
Posted - 2014.09.06 16:56:00 -
[10] - Quote
MonkeyBusiness Thiesant wrote:I'm sure it's all very impressive technically, but as a playing experience it's fairly horrible. Not trying to moan about this, that's just my genuine opinion. When you have 5 minutes before the game responds to a warp command, and modules start doing random buggy things, that's way beyond any sort of reasonable limit.
All of the above except I am moaning about it. We customers have been experiencing lag for far too long. Yes CCP, you keep coming up with grand announcements over how you've improved this and how you've analysed that but the lag remains.
While I was there last night I got out as soon as possible. It wasn't an enjoyable game it was a tedious wait. The plus side is I got to catch up with a couple of people I haven't chatted to in a long time. Until, that is, chat got so slow it was taking seconds before words appeared.
I'm all for content generation and I love the social/group side of the game but not when I have to experience the game in that form. |
|
DarklordKarn
north eastern swat Pandemic Legion
143
|
Posted - 2014.09.06 17:04:00 -
[11] - Quote
Kill mail, token "achievement item" (example Revenant scrap metal delivered to everyone who was in system at time of kill)
OR Skill point award for everyone in system, for wasting 5 hours of our lifes we aren't getting back...
Combined wasted time, for this event, 1041 Days. or 2.8 Years...
gg
;)
|
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
2815
|
Posted - 2014.09.06 17:18:00 -
[12] - Quote
the solution would have been to spawn a second revenant 5j away in a cyno jammed system :P eve style bounties (done) dust boarding parties imagine there is war and everybody cloaks - join FW |
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
4684
|
Posted - 2014.09.06 17:32:00 -
[13] - Quote
Don't act like teenagers about this, ye knew exactly what ye were infor.
Personally I had an awesome/awful(in equal measure) experience.
Cool event , glad I got to take a shot at the ship. I Hate tidi and despise that modules cease working, in all honesty I could put up with it if I knew my modules would work, that said , good job to ccp for shoveling hamsters into the machine like they did and kept the node running, seriously o7.
I'm not going to demand the killmail, but I would certainly like to hear something about it from ccp. =][= |
MonkeyBusiness Thiesant
randomly named no tax corp v2
8
|
Posted - 2014.09.06 17:33:00 -
[14] - Quote
Couple quick thoughts:
1) Is it possible to just turn off crimewatch in a LS system undergoing this level of tidi?
2) How about stopping drone use entirely in particularly heavy tidi? People can still turn up, just have to use non-drone ships. Obviously this sort of artificial limitation isn't ideal, and the droneswarm changes mentioned above will deal with the issue longterm, but if it makes big fleet fights more bearable that's clearly superior to the current situation. |
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
4684
|
Posted - 2014.09.06 17:40:00 -
[15] - Quote
MonkeyBusiness Thiesant wrote:Couple quick thoughts:
1) Is it possible to just turn off crimewatch in a LS system undergoing this level of tidi? Not an ideal solution, but at the same time not really a big loss in giant fleet situations either.
2) How about stopping drone use entirely in particularly heavy tidi? People can still turn up, just have to use non-drone ships. Obviously this sort of artificial limitation isn't at all ideal, and the droneswarm changes mentioned above will deal with the issue longterm, but if it makes big fleet fights more bearable that's clearly superior to the current situation. 1) thought the same thing
2)to restrictive, carriers would lose way to much functionality =][= |
Sentient Blade
Crisis Atmosphere
1336
|
Posted - 2014.09.06 18:41:00 -
[16] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:The last part is more tricky and the one we would appreciate feedback: How can we spread large fights over multiple systems in such a manner that it's fun for everyone involved? Some sort of a simultaneous mega-objective across multiple systems but only when there are many involved so you could still have single-system fights depending on man-power (we don't want to require people to always have 3000+ pilot fleets). This happened in B-R since there were fights in the staging systems and Titans and fleets were intercepted en route to B-R.
Cyno Jam / Prevent normal jump portals in the event of a timer, not just within the target system, but within [x] jumps.
You'd need brain-in-a-box as the lag would otherwise be horrific as people jump through, but it would present more opportunities for engaging an incoming fleet. |
Jandice Ymladris
Aurora Arcology
817
|
Posted - 2014.09.06 20:17:00 -
[17] - Quote
Bringing up good points here & the criticism is founded. However, the Tidi was to be expedted, just not this bad I'd think. Carrier kill events have been part of eve's entertainment for a while now (check the ingame event forum, usually has one lying around)
The high number of attendees was a big surprise however, albeit the fact it would be a revenant kill event & it being backed by CCP probably did contribute to people flocking like it like bees to honey.
Published a report on it: Revenant supercarrier destroyed as promotional stunt by Eve-Bet
I did add your blogpost on the Tidi as one of the informative links Rixx Javix, hope you don't mind. Revenant Carrier destroyed as promotional stunt by Eve-Bet!-á -áSansha's Nation intensifies attacks! |
Malcolm Otsolen
The Vo'Shun Bad Intention
0
|
Posted - 2014.09.06 20:28:00 -
[18] - Quote
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:Don't act like teenagers about this, ye knew exactly what ye were infor.
Personally I had an awesome/awful(in equal measure) experience.
Cool event , glad I got to take a shot at the ship. I Hate tidi and despise that modules cease working, in all honesty I could put up with it if I knew my modules would work, that said , good job to ccp for shoveling hamsters into the machine like they did and kept the node running, seriously o7.
I'm not going to demand the killmail, but I would certainly like to hear something about it from ccp.
No sir, I did not know as a new player. Never ever heard of TiDi nor do I like it. I will never do such a event again and if this what Null Sec is like I will stay in low sec or unsub.
|
|
CCP Explorer
C C P C C P Alliance
2347
|
Posted - 2014.09.06 21:20:00 -
[19] - Quote
MonkeyBusiness Thiesant wrote:Couple quick thoughts:
1) Is it possible to just turn off crimewatch in a LS system undergoing this level of tidi? Not an ideal solution, but at the same time not really a big loss in giant fleet situations either.
2) How about stopping drone use entirely in particularly heavy tidi? People can still turn up, just have to use non-drone ships. Obviously this sort of artificial limitation isn't at all ideal, and the droneswarm changes mentioned above will deal with the issue longterm, but if it makes big fleet fights more bearable that's clearly superior to the current situation. No on both, because if we did that then Time Dilation stops being a method to mitigate/spread load and instead becomes a game mechanic. Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Senior Development Director | EVE Online // CCP Games | @erlendur |
|
Rixx Javix
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
404
|
Posted - 2014.09.06 21:29:00 -
[20] - Quote
It is always difficult to provide feedback regarding one aspect of Eve given how inter-connected all aspects of the game are. And, given what Greyscale just told us it appears that Null Sec/Sov changes are well underway. Obviously this has been a hot topic for a long time. I mention Sov/Null since that is the underpinning for any discussion about massive fleet load, TiDi, and lag. Even when discussing live events.
In the case of individual ship targets, such as the Revenant, it remains a challenge that event planners must address. It would be hard to imagine a way to spread the load in such an instance.
Having said that, it wouldn't be hard to imagine three super-carriers - one each in different low-sec regions - having effectively spread the load that landed on Nisuwa. Again, this might be incredibly difficult to plan in most cases.
System limiters are not an effective answer, especially for event planners like myself that do not have CCP assistance (beyond reinforcement). (Which is always appreciated btw.)
In the end, as far as events are concerned, the challenge must land squarely on the shoulders of the event planners. Until the servers are updated, until Null Sov is addressed, until the technical challenges (such as drone swarms, missile spam, crime-watch, etc) are addressed - TiDi limitations are a known factor that must be considered.
I strongly believe that Live Events are an important part of Eve Online and that further incorporation of them into the universe is critical. It is up to us, in conjunction with CCP, to plan and prepare events with the known challenges in mind. http://eveoganda.blogspot.com |
|
Saisin
State War Academy Caldari State
135
|
Posted - 2014.09.06 23:13:00 -
[21] - Quote
Malcolm Otsolen wrote: No sir, I did not know as a new player. Never ever heard of TiDi nor do I like it. I will never do such a event again and if this what Null Sec is like I will stay in low sec or unsub.
Null sec is not all under tiDI as long as you stay away from large fleets. TiDI and the current large fleet fights is not fun, except for the elite few in command positions. This is one of the reason I chose to play this game solo, and I hope that CCP will at some point fix the issues with tiDI and large numbers of players in the same location, though it is quite a technical challenge I am sure.
When I get into null sec, I never go closer than two systems from the systems marked in red when looking at the map on the dotlan, with jumps selected. It is not a sure guarantee to avoid tiDI, but a fairly good indication of the risks of encountering large groups.
I also stay away of all the community events, as they are mostly IMHO a loss of time because of TiDI and the randomness that ensues. The last big fight I have been in was B-R5RB and it cured me from fleet fights under tiDI.
As a note, this is one of the reason CCP needs to cater to solo or small groups more than they do now. I am glad CCP Seagull has this on her radar (see sig link).
Stay in the game, and I hope you find your own entertainment niche...
"surrender your ego, be free". innuendo.
solo? There is a new hope http://turamarths-evelife.blogspot.com/2014/05/ok-now-im-betting-man.html |
Liam Reppola
Martyr's Vengence Nulli Secunda
0
|
Posted - 2014.09.06 23:15:00 -
[22] - Quote
Th event was cool in terms of sheer size - when grid loaded it was pretty impressive. Sadly, the tidi was pretty rough and my mods weren't working.
Is it possible to get an explanation as to why the Revenant never generated a killmail? |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
140
|
Posted - 2014.09.06 23:56:00 -
[23] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:Rixx Javix wrote:Excellent, and I have read those reports believe it or not. So this begs the question, what are our options? Given the technical limitations on server load and the increasing amount of reporting needing to be done, crime-watch, drones, etc., what are legitimate options for massive fleet battles or events?
Is it time to consider a hard limit on per system player numbers? What else can be done?
PS: I'm no fan of limits and I would never recommend them. Perhaps this is just one of those things that has no real answer. At least, not yet. 5,000 ships, each with their own modules, guns, drones, effects, sec status, etc, etc. There is only so much computing power available. Hard population cap is not the answer; that will become a tactic where the cap will be used to lock people out and avoid a fight. In terms of answers:
- More servers :) Just this week we were preparing RFPs for new hardware, to replace TQ.
- Team Gridlock is continuing on rewriting Dogma and on the Brain-in-a-Box project. There are also other things on the table such as drone-swarms where all drones act in a swarm like one drone, this would be similar to the grouped gun system. Given the O(n^2) nature of drones this would significantly reduce load in certain scenarios.
- The last part is more tricky and the one we would appreciate feedback: How can we spread large fights over multiple systems in such a manner that it's fun for everyone involved? Some sort of a simultaneous mega-objective across multiple systems but only when there are many involved so you could still have single-system fights depending on man-power (we don't want to require people to always have 3000+ pilot fleets). This happened in B-R since there were fights in the staging systems and Titans and fleets were intercepted en route to B-R.
For number 3
What if you ended up with a bunch of titans and a FYF (Celestis) Titans can't hit them and damps don't work on Titans
So, as far as to what ships get doled off to which systems matters, not to mention fleet/wing/squad bonuses If a fleet of NaPOCs have an Erebus with links as a FC and lose that, that is HUGE
Basically, I am not sure how to make breaking up the fights fair, because alot of stuff works thru synergy
Personally, I think this should be more of the new SOV mechanic, but let us decide who fights where, just make ti so X number of systems in a constellation has to have something done, rather than x number of gates in a system |
Burl en Daire
M.O.M.S. Corp
32
|
Posted - 2014.09.07 01:05:00 -
[24] - Quote
Rixx Javix wrote:Having said that, it wouldn't be hard to imagine three super-carriers - one each in different low-sec regions - having effectively spread the load that landed on Nisuwa. Again, this might be incredibly difficult to plan in most cases.
It would have probably kept Nisuwa from hitting 5K in system but if there were three super-carriers in three different systems then each system would have had 3K each because I think a lot of players stayed away because they knew it was going to be maxed TiDi. I was at work but if I had been home I would have stayed away because of the TiDi, it is just not my idea of fun.
Even if it was spread out the outcome would have been around the same. Max Tidi and a dead Super. I do want to say good job to CCP for being able to play a game where these types of things can happen, evebet. for the super and to all the pilots who showed up. Kudos to your patience. If no kill mail is generated then they should get an in game item like a piece of Steave. Yesterday's weirdness is tomorrow's reason why. Hunter S. Thompson
|
GeeShizzle MacCloud
470
|
Posted - 2014.09.07 02:00:00 -
[25] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:In terms of answers:
- The last part is more tricky and the one we would appreciate feedback: How can we spread large fights over multiple systems in such a manner that it's fun for everyone involved? Some sort of a simultaneous mega-objective across multiple systems but only when there are many involved so you could still have single-system fights depending on man-power (we don't want to require people to always have 3000+ pilot fleets). This happened in B-R since there were fights in the staging systems and Titans and fleets were intercepted en route to B-R.
My initial thought would be to instead of one system being independent in terms of sov vulnerability a constellation becomes vulnerable at a time, or systems within a certain LY distance from a sov interruption deployable. You have to hold the ground for a period of time in certain areas (that could be restricted by size like FW).
have multiple of these per system with an increasing points system for sites that allow larger ships. with more smaller sites and fewer larger sites. points accrue over a period of time and the most points for a certain alliance gets the sov claim, or drops a sov level.
its kinda abstract and not really that brutal in application i guess but it spreads the fight out and makes the idea of dominating someones space with more than just 1 apex force style fleet type at one specific time.
tbh its probably a terrible idea full of gaping holes of terribleness but off the top of my head its another idea to throw into the mix! |
Rain6637
Team Evil
18263
|
Posted - 2014.09.07 03:37:00 -
[26] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:MonkeyBusiness Thiesant wrote:Couple quick thoughts:
1) Is it possible to just turn off crimewatch in a LS system undergoing this level of tidi? Not an ideal solution, but at the same time not really a big loss in giant fleet situations either.
2) How about stopping drone use entirely in particularly heavy tidi? People can still turn up, just have to use non-drone ships. Obviously this sort of artificial limitation isn't at all ideal, and the droneswarm changes mentioned above will deal with the issue longterm, but if it makes big fleet fights more bearable that's clearly superior to the current situation. No on both, because if we did that then Time Dilation stops being a method to mitigate/spread load and instead becomes a game mechanic. I did not attend because TiDi is a very big toll on my soul, as a lot of people know / would agree. But it's good to see TiDi acknowledged as a viable strategy. It represents the removal of a very big disadvantage to multiboxing, which is reaction time.
I dislike TiDi, but it's not necessarily a bad thing (it has its advantages). However, until I have a reason to subject myself to it, I will avoid it when I can.
[I've made peace with TiDi] President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
11409
|
Posted - 2014.09.07 05:23:00 -
[27] - Quote
Sum Olgy wrote:MonkeyBusiness Thiesant wrote:I'm sure it's all very impressive technically, but as a playing experience it's fairly horrible. Not trying to moan about this, that's just my genuine opinion. When you have 5 minutes before the game responds to a warp command, and modules start doing random buggy things, that's way beyond any sort of reasonable limit.
All of the above except I am moaning about it. We customers have been experiencing lag for far too long. Yes CCP, you keep coming up with grand announcements over how you've improved this and how you've analysed that but the lag remains. I'm sorry that CCP hasn't solved P=NP for you personally but they're doing the best they can.
They have made significant improvements. The number of pilots you can cram into a system before you reach soul-crushing lag has increased dramatically in the past few years. Enjoying the rain today? ;) |
Akrasjel Lanate
Naquatech Conglomerate Naquatech Syndicate
1558
|
Posted - 2014.09.07 07:06:00 -
[28] - Quote
Oh and wrong subforum, this was not a live event... but a player event so it fits more into "In-Game Events and Gatherings" |
Viaharo Musa
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
22
|
Posted - 2014.09.07 07:54:00 -
[29] - Quote
Its well past 24hrs when the event took place. Where is the kill mail for the revenant? I have seen KM's now for every other ship Including the pod of the pilot that flew the revenant. But no revenant km it self. What gives? I mean it was a fun event and battle but still... |
El Creepo
Sex Machineguns Happy Cartel
1
|
Posted - 2014.09.07 09:33:00 -
[30] - Quote
Probably the 4000 people on the mail made the api poop its pants. Are there any other examples of a mail with so many people on it? |
|
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
4699
|
Posted - 2014.09.07 10:19:00 -
[31] - Quote
El Creepo wrote:Probably the 4000 people on the mail made the api poop its pants. Are there any other examples of a mail with so many people on it? not quite as many (dont open that with the ingame browser) =][= |
|
CCP Explorer
C C P C C P Alliance
2357
|
Posted - 2014.09.07 16:15:00 -
[32] - Quote
Saisin wrote:Malcolm Otsolen wrote:No sir, I did not know as a new player. Never ever heard of TiDi nor do I like it. I will never do such a event again and if this what Null Sec is like I will stay in low sec or unsub. Null sec is not all under tiDI as long as you stay away from large fleets. TiDI and the current large fleet fights is not fun, except for the elite few in command positions. This is one of the reason I chose to play this game solo, and I hope that CCP will at some point fix the issues with tiDI and large numbers of players in the same location, though it is quite a technical challenge I am sure. When I get into null sec, I never go closer than two systems from the systems marked in red when looking at the map on the dotlan, with jumps selected. It is not a sure guarantee to avoid tiDI, but a fairly good indication of the risks of encountering large groups. I also stay away of all the community events, as they are mostly IMHO a loss of time because of TiDI and the randomness that ensues. The last big fight I have been in was B-R5RB and it cured me from fleet fights under tiDI. As a note, this is one of the reason CCP needs to cater to solo or small groups more than they do now. I am glad CCP Seagull has this on her radar (see sig link). Stay in the game, and I hope you find your own entertainment niche... I want to address this misconception that there is something wrong with Time Dilation and there are some "TiDi issues" that need to get fixed.
Time Dilation is a mechanism to cope with load. As I explained in my first post, in terms of load there are 3 stages: Controlled CPU, 100% CPU but controlled Time Dilation, 100% CPU and 10% Time Dilation and Dogma Lateness setting in. It is when we get to a really large number of pilots (such as the 4920 pilots at peak in this case) and enormous load beyond what 10% Time Dilation can cope with that we start to see issues.
Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Senior Development Director | EVE Online // CCP Games | @erlendur |
|
|
CCP Explorer
C C P C C P Alliance
2357
|
Posted - 2014.09.07 16:19:00 -
[33] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:CCP Explorer wrote:MonkeyBusiness Thiesant wrote:Couple quick thoughts:
1) Is it possible to just turn off crimewatch in a LS system undergoing this level of tidi? Not an ideal solution, but at the same time not really a big loss in giant fleet situations either.
2) How about stopping drone use entirely in particularly heavy tidi? People can still turn up, just have to use non-drone ships. Obviously this sort of artificial limitation isn't at all ideal, and the droneswarm changes mentioned above will deal with the issue longterm, but if it makes big fleet fights more bearable that's clearly superior to the current situation. No on both, because if we did that then Time Dilation stops being a method to mitigate/spread load and instead becomes a game mechanic. I did not attend because TiDi is a very big toll on my soul, as a lot of people know / would agree. But it's good to see TiDi acknowledged as a viable strategy. It represents the removal of a very big disadvantage to multiboxing, which is reaction time. I dislike TiDi, but it's not necessarily a bad thing (it has its advantages). However, until I have a reason to subject myself to it, I will avoid it when I can. [I've made peace with TiDi] Again, I believe this is a misconception; Time Dilation is not the issue, it a mitigation method and works very well as such. It is when events are so large that not even 10% Time Dilation is able to cope with it that the experience starts to degrade.
Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Senior Development Director | EVE Online // CCP Games | @erlendur |
|
Viaharo Musa
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
22
|
Posted - 2014.09.07 16:52:00 -
[34] - Quote
CCP any reply about the km? |
|
CCP Explorer
C C P C C P Alliance
2357
|
Posted - 2014.09.07 17:01:00 -
[35] - Quote
Viaharo Musa wrote:CCP any reply about the km? I would recommend that the Revenant pilot contact Customer Support regarding any issues with the kill report. Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Senior Development Director | EVE Online // CCP Games | @erlendur |
|
God Arthie
Steel and Strong
4
|
Posted - 2014.09.07 18:58:00 -
[36] - Quote
So, we have a topic without any participation from Eve-Bet and CCP Explorer giving recommendations to the Revenant pilot(who may never see this post) to write a support ticket ? Well I would recommend that CCP Explorer write an in game mail to the pilot asking him DIRECTLY to write to support for a KNOWN issue.
Btw, I was there and TiDi is a cancer, after an hour of trying to repair my fleet members(actually just trying to lock them) I've got bored and docked (obviously another one of my chars died in the "docking state"). On a side note, missiles on one window were hitting the Revenant and RR's on the other window were stuck, so no, it does not fix lag issues.
And i was thinking about moving to null as the CCP killed the WH space, but I'm sure that after seeing such a cancer (called TiDi) you wouldn't see me living there. |
|
CCP Explorer
C C P C C P Alliance
2357
|
Posted - 2014.09.07 19:30:00 -
[37] - Quote
God Arthie wrote:So, we have a topic without any participation from Eve-Bet and CCP Explorer giving recommendations to the Revenant pilot(who may never see this post) to write a support ticket ? Well I would recommend that CCP Explorer write an in game mail to the pilot asking him DIRECTLY to write to support for a KNOWN issue.
Btw, I was there and TiDi is a cancer, after an hour of trying to repair my fleet members(actually just trying to lock them) I've got bored and docked (obviously another one of my chars died in the "docking state"). On a side note, missiles on one window were hitting the Revenant and RR's on the other window were stuck, so no, it does not fix lag issues.
And i was thinking about moving to null as the CCP killed the WH space, but I'm sure that after seeing such a cancer (called TiDi) you wouldn't see me living there. At the risk of repeating myself: Time Dilation doesn't fix lag issues, it mitigates load to enable vastly larger engagements to be had before lag issues set in. Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Senior Development Director | EVE Online // CCP Games | @erlendur |
|
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
4715
|
Posted - 2014.09.07 19:56:00 -
[38] - Quote
God Arthie wrote: Btw, I was there and TiDi is a cancer,
do you even understand what tidi is =][= |
Angmar Udate
14
|
Posted - 2014.09.07 20:03:00 -
[39] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:God Arthie wrote: ..., it does not fix lag issues.
And i was thinking about moving to null as the CCP killed the WH space, but I'm sure that after seeing such a cancer (called TiDi) you wouldn't see me living there. At the risk of repeating myself: Time Dilation doesn't fix lag issues, it mitigates load to enable vastly larger engagements to be had before lag issues set in.
In fact, Explorer, I think you are not clear enough: there exist no "fix" for lag. Any optimization on EVE side will just make it possible to pile more players into the system, players will and surprise, lag will hit. Years ago we had terrible lag and disconnects when we hit over 100 people in a system. EVE has come a long way and the fact that the server stay a live during a match with 5000 players in system is in one word amazing. Other MMOs struggle to put 5000 people on a single shard. If you feel tidi is cancer, next time, please just stay away from the event and it will be one less ship the server will have to deal with. Better time for everyone. |
Arch Stanton's Neighbour
Forceful Resource Acquisition Inc
80
|
Posted - 2014.09.07 20:17:00 -
[40] - Quote
Talon Draygo wrote:Well without a kill mail the whole thing was a complete waste of time in my opinion.
So you're one of those guys that travel on vacation and comeback without having seen anything because the whole time you had a camera in front of your face?
If all you want is the killmail I'm sure someone can draw one up in photoshop for you to link in your bio. |
|
God Arthie
Steel and Strong
4
|
Posted - 2014.09.07 20:26:00 -
[41] - Quote
Yes. I have the basic understanding on how TiDi works. It was my first experience with it, and i was really dissapointed, as i was expecting to see batch commands processing, so if someone would generate an event, the event and time would be recorded and in some time we would see the result, but in this case i've heard how people were already shooting the rev while i was still locking it(even if they warped after me). Yes, you are correct, i will try to stay as far from it as i can, and i was there because i wasnt expecting such a poor game experience. |
|
CCP Explorer
C C P C C P Alliance
2357
|
Posted - 2014.09.07 20:30:00 -
[42] - Quote
God Arthie wrote:Yes. I have the basic understanding on how TiDi works. It was my first experience with it, and i was really dissapointed, as i was expecting to see batch commands processing, so if someone would generate an event, the event and time would be recorded and in some time we would see the result, but in this case i've heard how people were already shooting the rev while i was still locking it(even if they warped after me). Just to be clear: You weren't experiencing Time Dilation, you were experiencing lag. Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Senior Development Director | EVE Online // CCP Games | @erlendur |
|
El Creepo
Sex Machineguns Happy Cartel
1
|
Posted - 2014.09.07 20:38:00 -
[43] - Quote
I dont think people grasp how incredible it is that 4000 pilots can be on a grid and it still function, even at the incredibly slow pace of tidi.
4000 pilots.
For reference, thats more players in system than a WoW server supports.... in one fight. You know tidi will kick in at an event like this, its up to you if you want to attend. If you dont like it, go do something in a small gang elsewhere and be lag free. It just amazes me how people think CCP are sh*t because of tidi when its actually an incredible bit of wizardry that it all works as well as it does. |
Eve-Bet One
Eve-Bet
26
|
Posted - 2014.09.07 21:00:00 -
[44] - Quote
God Arthie wrote:So, we have a topic without any participation from Eve-Bet... Sorry Space Friend! I completely missed this thread. I did reply in the original thread.
CCP Explorer wrote:Viaharo Musa wrote:CCP any reply about the km? I would recommend that the Revenant pilot contact Customer Support regarding any issues with the kill report.
God Arthie wrote:...CCP Explorer giving recommendations to the Revenant pilot(who may never see this post) to write a support ticket ? Well I would recommend that CCP Explorer write an in game mail to the pilot asking him DIRECTLY to write to support for a KNOWN issue.
Unfortunately, I had not lodged a support ticket. I have now! That said, given the publicity of the event, I am sure CCP knows about the lack of a KM and the communities desire to see one. I had also contacted CCP by other means regarding the KM. I am sure they where pretty busy with AT XII, as where we.
A huge thankyou to those who participated. A massive thankyou for CCP participating with out crazy hair-brained scheme. Sorry about kinda breaking your servers!
Cheers, Eve-Bet |
Viaharo Musa
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
22
|
Posted - 2014.09.07 21:01:00 -
[45] - Quote
El Creepo wrote:I dont think people grasp how incredible it is that 4000 pilots can be on a grid and it still function, even at the incredibly slow pace of tidi.
4000 pilots.
For reference, thats more players in system than a WoW server supports.... in one fight. You know tidi will kick in at an event like this, its up to you if you want to attend. If you dont like it, go do something in a small gang elsewhere and be lag free. It just amazes me how people think CCP are sh*t because of tidi when its actually an incredible bit of wizardry that it all works as well as it does.
i do have to say, i agree. the system held up wonderfully with the shear ammount of people in local at once all fighting. It was way better than the battle of b-r. My only complaint is lack of the juicy km lol. I know i was aggressed on the target and firing at the time it died so... i guess all in good time.
Litterally that is my only complaint. Epic event imho |
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
1919
|
Posted - 2014.09.07 22:25:00 -
[46] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:God Arthie wrote:Yes. I have the basic understanding on how TiDi works. It was my first experience with it, and i was really dissapointed, as i was expecting to see batch commands processing, so if someone would generate an event, the event and time would be recorded and in some time we would see the result, but in this case i've heard how people were already shooting the rev while i was still locking it(even if they warped after me). Just to be clear: You weren't experiencing Time Dilation, you were experiencing soul crushing lag.
FYP There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:
Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad. |
Caroline Grace
Grace Stellar Conveyance Inc.
548
|
Posted - 2014.09.07 22:28:00 -
[47] - Quote
El Creepo wrote:I dont think people grasp how incredible it is that 4000 pilots can be on a grid and it still function, even at the incredibly slow pace of tidi.
4000 pilots.
For reference, thats more players in system than a WoW server supports.... in one fight. You know tidi will kick in at an event like this, its up to you if you want to attend. If you dont like it, go do something in a small gang elsewhere and be lag free. It just amazes me how people think CCP are sh*t because of tidi when its actually an incredible bit of wizardry that it all works as well as it does. And you should grasp that I don't give a flying unicorn about how many players can EVE handle in one system or how amazing technical achievement it is. That's stuff to celebrate in dedicated experiments, in special stress-server games and demos.
I am a player and paying customer in a mainstream MMO, and wonder no more, in events like these, I care and will care only about fun factor, not about how many people can the server handle.
All this notion about being grateful because being part of absolutely unplayable, boring, "good for press" experiment is sassy. I don't give a chocolate monkey milk about 4000 people in one system without any signs of fun, when I can have more fun even watching 40 people farting in real life.
Single shard events and big fights don't work in EVE. They work only in press. It's time to wake up. |
Sum Olgy
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
70
|
Posted - 2014.09.07 23:13:00 -
[48] - Quote
Caroline Grace wrote:[ Single shard events and big fights don't work in EVE. They work only in press. It's time to wake up.
This. And well said. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1524
|
Posted - 2014.09.08 02:12:00 -
[49] - Quote
Sum Olgy wrote:Caroline Grace wrote:[ Single shard events and big fights don't work in EVE. They work only in press. It's time to wake up. This. And well said. Actually, that is exactly the reason most of us play EVE. Single Shard. I have learnt to loath multi shard games. Especially multi shard PvP games. All they do in encourage cross shard spying, dirty tactics and throw away troll accounts. Obviously these still exist on EVE, But at least here they aren't from the 'well I pay a subscription for my main shard, and it lets me make accounts on all these other shards so TROLL'
The big fights also work, you just have to learn how to play while under TiDi, and also learn how to deal with lag. Pro Tip, hammering away at F1 is not the right way.
Lastly, this was not a CCP event. This was a player event. Don't blame CCP for piling you all into one system, they had nothing to do with that. |
Caroline Grace
Grace Stellar Conveyance Inc.
548
|
Posted - 2014.09.08 03:38:00 -
[50] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote: Actually, that is exactly the reason most of us play EVE. Single Shard. I have learnt to loath multi shard games. Especially multi shard PvP games. All they do in encourage cross shard spying, dirty tactics and throw away troll accounts. Obviously these still exist on EVE, But at least here they aren't from the 'well I pay a subscription for my main shard, and it lets me make accounts on all these other shards so TROLL'
The big fights also work, you just have to learn how to play while under TiDi, and also learn how to deal with lag. Pro Tip, hammering away at F1 is not the right way.
Lastly, this was not a CCP event. This was a player event. Don't blame CCP for piling you all into one system, they had nothing to do with that. I was talking about single shard server when comes to big battles and events, you potato. Big battles don't work because they're absolutely not fun to play. No matter how many tricks you know to play under tidi/lag. It's boring, it's bad, it's soul crushing.
CCP gave an official and direct support to this event, however I fail to see where I blamed CCP for anything, since my reaction was to a player who thinks people should be grateful and silent because we have a technological miracle while playing under miserable gaming experience.
Please read the context properly next time, before mumbling unicorn's poops. |
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1524
|
Posted - 2014.09.08 03:43:00 -
[51] - Quote
Caroline Grace wrote: I was talking about single shard server when comes to big battles and events, you potato. Big battles don't work because they're absolutely not fun to play. No matter how many tricks you know to play under tidi/lag. It's boring, it's bad, it's soul crushing.
CCP gave an official and direct support to this event, however I fail to see where I blamed CCP for anything, since my reaction was to a player who thinks people should be grateful and silent because we have a technological miracle while playing under miserable gaming experience.
Please read the context properly next time, before mumbling unicorn's poops. I did read the context, you were complaining about players being players and screwing themselves. Also would someone please direct me to this 'official & direct' support CCP gave this event that makes it so unusual? As far as I've seen they... reinforced a node because they were advised there would be a large fight? And a CCP Dev or two decided to cruise around watching a player event.
Neither of these things are direct or official.
So yes, you should be grateful to CCP for making the node stay up despite the PLAYER EVENTS best efforts otherwise. And you shouldn't abuse them for no kill mail. |
Saisin
State War Academy Caldari State
136
|
Posted - 2014.09.08 04:03:00 -
[52] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:Time Dilation is a mechanism to cope with load. As I explained in my first post, in terms of load there are 3 stages: Controlled CPU, 100% CPU but controlled Time Dilation, 100% CPU and 10% Time Dilation and Dogma Lateness setting in. It is when we get to a really large number of pilots (such as the 4920 pilots at peak in this case) and enormous load beyond what 10% Time Dilation can cope with that we start to see issues.
I stand corrected.
Tidi itself is a good improvement compared to how large fleet fights used to be before it existed.It is also a very smart way to keep the game going with higher number of pilots until other technical solutions can be found to improve larger fleet fights
Still playing under TiDi is not the best gaming experience, even if TiDi by itself is doing its job well. I should not have thrown it under the bus as I did, where I was mainly speaking of the experience itself.
I do like the concept of large fleet fights, and this is one of the reasons I stick with Eve and keep it as my main gaming hobby. I hope I can join large fleet fights again someday, when I can enjoy the game experience that comes with it. Until then, for me, there are plenty of other fun stuff to do in Eve
"surrender your ego, be free". innuendo.
solo? There is a new hope http://turamarths-evelife.blogspot.com/2014/05/ok-now-im-betting-man.html |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
5408
|
Posted - 2014.09.08 04:18:00 -
[53] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:Rixx Javix wrote:Excellent, and I have read those reports believe it or not. So this begs the question, what are our options? Given the technical limitations on server load and the increasing amount of reporting needing to be done, crime-watch, drones, etc., what are legitimate options for massive fleet battles or events?
Is it time to consider a hard limit on per system player numbers? What else can be done?
PS: I'm no fan of limits and I would never recommend them. Perhaps this is just one of those things that has no real answer. At least, not yet. 5,000 ships, each with their own modules, guns, drones, effects, sec status, etc, etc. There is only so much computing power available. Hard population cap is not the answer; that will become a tactic where the cap will be used to lock people out and avoid a fight. In terms of answers:
- More servers :) Just this week we were preparing RFPs for new hardware, to replace TQ.
- Team Gridlock is continuing on rewriting Dogma and on the Brain-in-a-Box project. There are also other things on the table such as drone-swarms where all drones act in a swarm like one drone, this would be similar to the grouped gun system. Given the O(n^2) nature of drones this would significantly reduce load in certain scenarios.
- The last part is more tricky and the one we would appreciate feedback: How can we spread large fights over multiple systems in such a manner that it's fun for everyone involved? Some sort of a simultaneous mega-objective across multiple systems but only when there are many involved so you could still have single-system fights depending on man-power (we don't want to require people to always have 3000+ pilot fleets). This happened in B-R since there were fights in the staging systems and Titans and fleets were intercepted en route to B-R.
For number 3, I think you'd practically have to change the whole game around. What you describe in item 3 is indeed epic, but that's a lot to think about. Bring back DEEEEP Space! |
Texty
State War Academy Caldari State
102
|
Posted - 2014.09.08 05:18:00 -
[54] - Quote
Caroline Grace wrote:...
Single shard events and big fights don't work in EVE. They work only in press. It's time to wake up.
My understanding is that EVE is practically the only game on the market capable of handling fights of this scale. Other games aren't even remotely close.
|
Altirius Saldiaro
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
108
|
Posted - 2014.09.08 05:26:00 -
[55] - Quote
Event was boring. I definitely don't want to be in a system with that many toons again. Only went to ***** on a Rev killmail. Still no killmail out yet? Oh well. Seems like a waste of hours type experience. Next eve-bet event, I'll just pass. There's mich better things to do in eve than sit in tidi. Playing a game in slow motion is more fun when stoned. |
El Creepo
Sex Machineguns Happy Cartel
2
|
Posted - 2014.09.08 05:42:00 -
[56] - Quote
Caroline Grace wrote:El Creepo wrote:I dont think people grasp how incredible it is that 4000 pilots can be on a grid and it still function, even at the incredibly slow pace of tidi.
4000 pilots.
For reference, thats more players in system than a WoW server supports.... in one fight. You know tidi will kick in at an event like this, its up to you if you want to attend. If you dont like it, go do something in a small gang elsewhere and be lag free. It just amazes me how people think CCP are sh*t because of tidi when its actually an incredible bit of wizardry that it all works as well as it does. And you should grasp that I don't give a flying unicorn about how many players can EVE handle in one system or how amazing technical achievement it is. That's stuff to celebrate in dedicated experiments, in special stress-server games and demos. I am a player and paying customer in a mainstream MMO, and wonder no more, in events like these, I care and will care only about fun factor, not about how many people can the server handle. All this notion about being grateful because being part of absolutely unplayable, boring, "good for press" experiment is sassy. I don't give a chocolate monkey milk about 4000 people in one system without any signs of fun, when I can have more fun even watching 40 people farting in real life. Single shard events and big fights don't work in EVE. They work only in press. It's time to wake up. Then... Do. Something. Else.
I'm not telling you to be greatful, I'm telling you to do something else in the 5000+ systems of Eve that were at that time free of tidi and massive fleets. Nobody made you come and it was obvious this was going to happen with a Rev kill on the go. So because you dont want this to be a gameplay factor CCP should eliminate large scale PVP from the game for everyone? Dont be an idiot.
Personally I HATE blob warfare. If theres more than 20-30 folk in a system I groan and the best thing I did was get out of powerblock sov years ago after being in it for the best part of a year. (if you thought killing a Rev was boring, try rolling sov systems) I love that this crap is going on in the background though. Eve isnt my favorite game of all time, probably makes top 20 in the low teens, but I honestly think its the most impressive and most important game currently and of the last 6-8 years. Ive been playing Elite and there is so damn much thats crap that they should be looking at Eve for the answers to because theyve been perfecting that crap for a decade now. |
Jarnis McPieksu
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
559
|
Posted - 2014.09.08 10:06:00 -
[57] - Quote
Those new to TiDi fights;
Revenant event was not an example how TiDi fights work. Do not diss TiDi based on this horrendously laggy "I'm shocked the server didn't die in a fire"-event.
Normal TiDi fights work perfectly well, just slowly.
Revenant event worked very poorly. Guns got stuck, response times varied, some commands never got processed etc. Even the infamous "soul-crushing lag" popup was reported from time to time.
..but for those who are old timers, this used to be the norm for 800-1000 people fights. Past 1000 the server just keeled over and died (everyone got kicked out). TiDi and general improvements in server code allowed the server to stay alive at nearly 5000 pilots and you still could kinda, maybe do something if you tried really hard and had a lot of patience.
(TiDi commonly kicks in at around 500+ people fights, with some TiDi "spikes" during large fleet jumps/undocks even with smaller pilot counts)
Those who were in system early can confirm that the Revenant event system worked fine (under TiDi) until it hit slightly over 2000 pilots in local. |
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
925
|
Posted - 2014.09.08 17:29:00 -
[58] - Quote
Can we has graphs, pictures and metrics in a dev blog. I love the dev blogs about this stuff with lots of graphs and other cool info. Also to the people who say this was a waste of time because of no kill mail. Have you stopped to think that so many people on 1 kill mail broke the kill mail system? Did you think that you know you did something more for EvE than you realized? Fights like this help future fleet fights and server development and help improve code by finding issues that happen with large fights. |
Talon Draygo
Capsuleer Outfitters Bad Intention
48
|
Posted - 2014.09.08 17:33:00 -
[59] - Quote
Jarnis McPieksu wrote:Those new to TiDi fights;
Revenant event was not an example how TiDi fights work. Do not diss TiDi based on this horrendously laggy "I'm shocked the server didn't die in a fire"-event.
Normal TiDi fights work perfectly well, just slowly.
Revenant event worked very poorly. Guns got stuck, response times varied, some commands never got processed etc. Even the infamous "soul-crushing lag" popup was reported from time to time.
..but for those who are old timers, this used to be the norm for 800-1000 people fights. Past 1000 the server just keeled over and died (everyone got kicked out). TiDi and general improvements in server code allowed the server to stay alive at nearly 5000 pilots and you still could kinda, maybe do something if you tried really hard and had a lot of patience.
(TiDi commonly kicks in at around 500+ people fights, with some TiDi "spikes" during large fleet jumps/undocks even with smaller pilot counts)
Those who were in system early can confirm that the Revenant event system worked fine (under TiDi) until it hit slightly over 2000 pilots in local.
Yeah there was only 850 people in local when my 12 man fleet arrived. There was zero tidi until around 2500. At one point we had over 5000 pilots in system.
I think the mechanics in general worked fine the only suggestion I would make for these events is to have an active cyno jammer so fleets actually had to work to get into system instead of just dropping 3 to 4 hundred people in the system. |
Caroline Grace
Grace Stellar Conveyance Inc.
551
|
Posted - 2014.09.08 19:30:00 -
[60] - Quote
Lot of people here seems to be very confused about what "TiDi doesn't work" means. It is not about technical stuff (which is also not perfect), but about the fun factor. There is no fun in slow-soul-eating 12 hours looking at your monitor while your ship is capable of doing 3 thing in total -- yes, while perfectly and slowly. Period.
Nevyn Auscent, the support was official and that is the end of the story. The event was even broadcasted through official channels, so yes, it was a direct support from CCP. And no, I won't be grateful for horrible gaming experience just because of someone's effort and technical miracles. As I said, I care about the fun factor. You know what does it mean to play a game, yes?
El Creepo, this thread is called Event Feedback. If every time a reaction to negative feedback would be "Then go to do something else", you would be playing alone in your own smelly potato world. In any case, you fail to understand I was not talking about the live event itself (it was horrible as usual lately, and I have tons of events behind me), but about people who think we should always celebrate the fact servers can handle 5000 people and be actually happy about it and grasp it and embrace it. Every time big fight or event happens, I read only good stuff about it in press. Not from players. Also I haven't said anything about removing large scales combats from EVE. Good lord, these flaming threads. |
|
|
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
2116
|
Posted - 2014.09.08 20:13:00 -
[61] - Quote
Talon Draygo wrote: At one point we had over 5000 pilots in system. And the server kept going.... Let me assure you that if someone would have told me that several years back, I would have bought them a beer. I also would have laughed hard straight in their face...
That said, I have removed some rule breaking posts and those quoting them. As always I let some edge cases stay. Please people, keep it on topic and above all civil!
The Rules: 3. Ranting is prohibited.
A rant is a post that is often filled with angry and counterproductive comments. A free exchange of ideas is essential to building a strong sense of community and is helpful in development of the game and community. Rants are disruptive, and incite flaming and trolling. Please post your thoughts in a concise and clear manner while avoiding going off on rambling tangents.
4. Personal attacks are prohibited.
Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.
8. Use of profanity is prohibited.
The use of profanity is prohibited on the EVE Online forums. This includes the partial masking of letters using numbers or alternate symbols, and any attempts at bypassing the profanity filter. ISD Ezwal Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
Speedkermit Damo
Demonic Retribution
298
|
Posted - 2014.09.09 16:33:00 -
[62] - Quote
having experienced TiDi before, i kind of knew what to expect, but the sheer number of pilots attending this event surprised me. I though we might get half the number that actually turned up.
The experience of course was terrible, managed to fire one salvo of missiles in four hours.
Most Eve players will would never get a chance to get on a supercap killmail, and nearly five thousand players turned up to get one, so CCP you'd better get on with it, and sort that killmail out or I predict there's going to be trouble. Repeatedly pissing off your clients is not good for business so please get this one right for a change. Don't Panic.
|
Coffee Rocks
Thrall Nation Brave Collective
320
|
Posted - 2014.09.09 21:04:00 -
[63] - Quote
Jandice Ymladris has a wonderful article recently posted on The Coffee Rocks:
The Nisuwa Revenant Kill Event (or how we tried to murder the servers)
Outstanding summation of the technical aspects of this Live Event, and the problems that occurred. http://www.thecoffeerocks.com Twitter: @thecoffeerocks |-áSteam: CoffeeRocks-á https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=327221 |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1532
|
Posted - 2014.09.10 01:33:00 -
[64] - Quote
Speedkermit Damo wrote: The last live event was a PR disaster. Repeatedly pissing off your clients is not good for business so please get this one right for a change. You know this wasn't a Live Event right? This was a player event, quite different and this thread is really in the wrong forum. |
Coffee Rocks
Thrall Nation Brave Collective
322
|
Posted - 2014.09.10 03:52:00 -
[65] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Speedkermit Damo wrote: The last live event was a PR disaster. Repeatedly pissing off your clients is not good for business so please get this one right for a change. You know this wasn't a Live Event right? This was a player event ...
Bingo.
Player driven events with this kind of a prize ("come here and shoot this") tend to create this problem. Nothing against eve-bet: I still applaud anyone that tries to shake it up! http://www.thecoffeerocks.com Twitter: @thecoffeerocks |-áSteam: CoffeeRocks-á https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=327221 |
Azami Nevinyrall
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
1990
|
Posted - 2014.09.10 06:25:00 -
[66] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:
The last part is more tricky and the one we would appreciate feedback: How can we spread large fights over multiple systems in such a manner that it's fun for everyone involved? Some sort of a simultaneous mega-objective across multiple systems but only when there are many involved so you could still have single-system fights depending on man-power (we don't want to require people to always have 3000+ pilot fleets). This happened in B-R since there were fights in the staging systems and Titans and fleets were intercepted en route to B-R. [/list]
This...I might have an answer to!
I'm currently penning a mechanic to allow for this in Nullsec. Its a more...."down to Earth"....solution. Working on the final details and also, wondering who can I discuss this with in a serious and non-trolly manner. EVE needs more Pssshhhh |
|
CCP Falcon
8931
|
Posted - 2014.09.13 22:15:00 -
[67] - Quote
For reference, this was not a CCP hosted event, and wasn't organized by us.
There seems to be misconceptions by some people that this event was CCP organized. That isn't the case.
A little assistance was provided, however
CCP Falcon || Community Manager || @CCP_Falcon
Happy Birthday To FAWLTY7! <3 |
|
God Arthie
Steel and Strong
9
|
Posted - 2014.09.13 22:22:00 -
[68] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:... A little assistance was provided, however So that's why there is no KM =). |
Durzel
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
273
|
Posted - 2014.09.14 09:02:00 -
[69] - Quote
Talon Draygo wrote:Well without a kill mail the whole thing was a complete waste of time in my opinion. The lure of a killmail was the reason there were so many people there to begin with, so it's a self-defeating behaviour. It was a completely artificial fight.
That's not to say that CCP shouldn't strive to enable 4000+ person fights, but they shouldn't care too much about events that are only as popular as they are because of legions of people who don't care who is involved or why it's happening but just want to pad their killboards. |
Sales Alt negrodamus
SalesAltCorp
7
|
Posted - 2014.09.15 11:49:00 -
[70] - Quote
Explorer, just out of curiosity, how big are the technical hurdles to hosting a single eve system on multiple physical devices (read: cluster)?
|
|
Fix Lag
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
783
|
Posted - 2014.09.15 13:41:00 -
[71] - Quote
fix it fix it fix it CCP mostly sucks at their job, but Veritas is a pretty cool dude. |
Barbaydos
Black Scorpions Inc Circle-Of-Two
17
|
Posted - 2014.09.15 13:50:00 -
[72] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:The last part is more tricky and the one we would appreciate feedback: How can we spread large fights over multiple systems in such a manner that it's fun for everyone involved? Some sort of a simultaneous mega-objective across multiple systems but only when there are many involved so you could still have single-system fights depending on man-power (we don't want to require people to always have 3000+ pilot fleets). This happened in B-R since there were fights in the staging systems and Titans and fleets were intercepted en route to B-R. [/list]
2 ideas here
would it be possible that if multiple systems are reinforced within the same region or constellation they could have a linked timer? i.e. an ihub and a station within the same constellation are both reinforced and because of the linked timers they come out at the same time.
if you dont hit both targets and succeed with both timers within say 15mins of each other then the target that was not successfully hit within that 15min window gets an accelerated regen rate until it resets back to either the previous timer or full hp.
OR
for each timer you hit a anomaly or plex site spawns with a target that must be killed within a certain time. killing the target would result in a reduction in hp of the main target whilst defending the target would result in a hp bonus to the main target.
so basically if you attack the secondary site you help your main attack on the main structure, whereas if you dont then you only just make the job harder for yourself.
|
|
CCP Explorer
C C P C C P Alliance
2372
|
Posted - 2014.09.15 14:59:00 -
[73] - Quote
Sales Alt negrodamus wrote:Explorer, just out of curiosity, how big are the technical hurdles to hosting a single eve system on multiple physical devices (read: cluster)? In terms of hosting the simulation itself (both the physics simulation and the damage simulation) on multiple devices then that is very difficult.
Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Senior Development Director | EVE Online // CCP Games | @erlendur |
|
Sierra Payne
Confederation of Independent Contractors Swamphole
0
|
Posted - 2014.09.15 15:53:00 -
[74] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote: Team Gridlock is continuing on rewriting Dogma and on the Brain-in-a-Box project. There are also other things on the table such as drone-swarms where all drones act in a swarm like one drone, this would be similar to the grouped gun system. Given the O(n^2) nature of drones this would significantly reduce load in certain scenarios.
Would it be an idea that when TiDi goes under 10%, that each player gets a sort of notification that's non-intrusive that tells them their command has been send to the server? That way you may reduce some input lag as well? |
Arthur Pendrag
BOVRIL bOREers Mining CO-OP Brave Collective
0
|
Posted - 2014.09.15 16:22:00 -
[75] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:Sales Alt negrodamus wrote:Explorer, just out of curiosity, how big are the technical hurdles to hosting a single eve system on multiple physical devices (read: cluster)? In terms of hosting the simulation itself (both the physics simulation and the damage simulation) on multiple devices then that is very difficult.
Does the difficulty arise from trying to keep multiple nodes synchronized, serialize events, or ??? Finding a way to parallelize the handling of a solar system seems like a fascinating challenge with a huge payoff if you can make it work. With the way Intel keeps managing to cram more cores into every cpu generation yet not significantly increasing the execution speed of single threads it just begs you to spread the work load around. |
Chagatai Chinua
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
0
|
Posted - 2014.09.15 16:23:00 -
[76] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:MonkeyBusiness Thiesant wrote:Couple quick thoughts:
1) Is it possible to just turn off crimewatch in a LS system undergoing this level of tidi? Not an ideal solution, but at the same time not really a big loss in giant fleet situations either.
2) How about stopping drone use entirely in particularly heavy tidi? People can still turn up, just have to use non-drone ships. Obviously this sort of artificial limitation isn't at all ideal, and the droneswarm changes mentioned above will deal with the issue longterm, but if it makes big fleet fights more bearable that's clearly superior to the current situation. No on both, because if we did that then Time Dilation stops being a method to mitigate/spread load and instead becomes a game mechanic.
In Real Life, the mechanisms which maintain social order, such as policing, do in fact break down in the face of "unexpected load." Lots of things that would get you arrested on a normal day will pass unnoticed in the middle of a large demonstration, to say nothing of a riot.
So it wouldn't be unrealistic per se to have an actual mechanic where law enforcement response - CONCORD and even security status penalties - become degraded in the face of massive system population.
I don't think its stretching the lore too far to suggest that the physical substrate of drone communication, whether it be EM spectrum or some hyperwave thing, is not infinite and thus there is a cap on the total amount of drone activity that can occur on a given grid.
It's true that this is basically retconning a mechanic that suits the limitations of the current implementation, but to be honest that's something every game does, not just MMOs or computer games. |
Xenuria
The Scope Gallente Federation
954
|
Posted - 2014.09.15 17:26:00 -
[77] - Quote
I realize that some of the hardware is classified but I would appreciate any transparency that is possible. It's nice to know that some super amazing hardware is doing hardware stuff but I for one would like to have charts and infopics on the utilization of the hardware. I want to see actual technical specs like speeds and such.
Obviously that cannot be done for the jita server because it's supa sekret. I just want to see much more transparency on the technical aspect. CSM 9 Candidate Philanthropist Polymath Savant Hero |
Max Kolonko
High Voltage Industries Ash Alliance
450
|
Posted - 2014.09.15 17:39:00 -
[78] - Quote
Arthur Pendrag wrote:CCP Explorer wrote:Sales Alt negrodamus wrote:Explorer, just out of curiosity, how big are the technical hurdles to hosting a single eve system on multiple physical devices (read: cluster)? In terms of hosting the simulation itself (both the physics simulation and the damage simulation) on multiple devices then that is very difficult. Does the difficulty arise from trying to keep multiple nodes synchronized, serialize events, or ??? Finding a way to parallelize the handling of a solar system seems like a fascinating challenge with a huge payoff if you can make it work. With the way Intel keeps managing to cram more cores into every cpu generation yet not significantly increasing the execution speed of single threads it just begs you to spread the work load around.
This comes up all the time and answer is the same. Difficulty comes from the fact that eve is single threaded. It would have to be rewritten to support multi-threading.
Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff? |
Arthur Pendrag
BOVRIL bOREers Mining CO-OP Brave Collective
0
|
Posted - 2014.09.15 17:45:00 -
[79] - Quote
Max Kolonko wrote:Arthur Pendrag wrote:CCP Explorer wrote:Sales Alt negrodamus wrote:Explorer, just out of curiosity, how big are the technical hurdles to hosting a single eve system on multiple physical devices (read: cluster)? In terms of hosting the simulation itself (both the physics simulation and the damage simulation) on multiple devices then that is very difficult. Does the difficulty arise from trying to keep multiple nodes synchronized, serialize events, or ??? Finding a way to parallelize the handling of a solar system seems like a fascinating challenge with a huge payoff if you can make it work. With the way Intel keeps managing to cram more cores into every cpu generation yet not significantly increasing the execution speed of single threads it just begs you to spread the work load around. This comes up all the time and answer is the same. Difficulty comes from the fact that eve is single threaded. It would have to be rewritten to support multi-threading.
I thought that referred to the client and not necessarily the server side.
|
Max Kolonko
High Voltage Industries Ash Alliance
450
|
Posted - 2014.09.15 18:22:00 -
[80] - Quote
Arthur Pendrag wrote:Max Kolonko wrote:Arthur Pendrag wrote:CCP Explorer wrote:Sales Alt negrodamus wrote:Explorer, just out of curiosity, how big are the technical hurdles to hosting a single eve system on multiple physical devices (read: cluster)? In terms of hosting the simulation itself (both the physics simulation and the damage simulation) on multiple devices then that is very difficult. Does the difficulty arise from trying to keep multiple nodes synchronized, serialize events, or ??? Finding a way to parallelize the handling of a solar system seems like a fascinating challenge with a huge payoff if you can make it work. With the way Intel keeps managing to cram more cores into every cpu generation yet not significantly increasing the execution speed of single threads it just begs you to spread the work load around. This comes up all the time and answer is the same. Difficulty comes from the fact that eve is single threaded. It would have to be rewritten to support multi-threading. I thought that referred to the client and not necessarily the server side.
That definitely refers to server side. Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff? |
|
Locke DieDrake
The Arrow Project
26
|
Posted - 2014.09.15 19:54:00 -
[81] - Quote
Sales Alt negrodamus wrote:Explorer, just out of curiosity, how big are the technical hurdles to hosting a single eve system on multiple physical devices (read: cluster)?
The game code was made before multi-core/MPP systems became the standard hosting paradigm. Meaning, in order for EVE to run on a single solar system on multiple pieces of hardware (IE: clustering) they would have to rewrite a great deal of the base code. Something they have been utterly unwilling to do. See POS code, corp code, basically every major issue with the game... it starts right here. |
|
CCP Explorer
C C P C C P Alliance
2375
|
Posted - 2014.09.15 20:30:00 -
[82] - Quote
Sierra Payne wrote:CCP Explorer wrote:Team Gridlock is continuing on rewriting Dogma and on the Brain-in-a-Box project. There are also other things on the table such as drone-swarms where all drones act in a swarm like one drone, this would be similar to the grouped gun system. Given the O(n^2) nature of drones this would significantly reduce load in certain scenarios. Would it be an idea that when TiDi goes under 10%, that each player gets a sort of notification that's non-intrusive that tells them their command has been send to the server? That way you may reduce some input lag as well? Commands are sent by the client, received by the server and put into the processing queue in a matter of a couple of seconds at most even under heavy load and lag. Even for exceptionally large events, such as this one, we rarely if ever see scheduler lag. We then rarely see any processing queues build up, except for the damage calculation queue (this system is called Dogma). Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Senior Development Director | EVE Online // CCP Games | @erlendur |
|
|
CCP Explorer
C C P C C P Alliance
2375
|
Posted - 2014.09.15 20:33:00 -
[83] - Quote
Arthur Pendrag wrote:CCP Explorer wrote:Sales Alt negrodamus wrote:Explorer, just out of curiosity, how big are the technical hurdles to hosting a single eve system on multiple physical devices (read: cluster)? In terms of hosting the simulation itself (both the physics simulation and the damage simulation) on multiple devices then that is very difficult. Does the difficulty arise from trying to keep multiple nodes synchronized, serialize events, or ??? Finding a way to parallelize the handling of a solar system seems like a fascinating challenge with a huge payoff if you can make it work. With the way Intel keeps managing to cram more cores into every cpu generation yet not significantly increasing the execution speed of single threads it just begs you to spread the work load around. All of the above. It's not really even a matter of hosting a solarsystem on multiple nodes since we would have to reap the benefits in big fights where all the action takes place on a single grid and everyone is potentially affecting everyone else and at least everyone needs to know about everyone else (and all their drones). Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Senior Development Director | EVE Online // CCP Games | @erlendur |
|
|
CCP Explorer
C C P C C P Alliance
2375
|
Posted - 2014.09.15 20:36:00 -
[84] - Quote
Xenuria wrote:I realize that some of the hardware is classified but I would appreciate any transparency that is possible. It's nice to know that some super amazing hardware is doing hardware stuff but I for one would like to have charts and infopics on the utilization of the hardware. I want to see actual technical specs like speeds and such.
Obviously that cannot be done for the jita server because it's supa sekret. I just want to see much more transparency on the technical aspect. We will write a devblog on the new hardware once we have replies to the RFPs and have made a decision on both what we are buying and when. Currently this in RFP stage. Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Senior Development Director | EVE Online // CCP Games | @erlendur |
|
|
CCP Explorer
C C P C C P Alliance
2375
|
Posted - 2014.09.15 20:38:00 -
[85] - Quote
Max Kolonko wrote:Arthur Pendrag wrote:CCP Explorer wrote:Sales Alt negrodamus wrote:Explorer, just out of curiosity, how big are the technical hurdles to hosting a single eve system on multiple physical devices (read: cluster)? In terms of hosting the simulation itself (both the physics simulation and the damage simulation) on multiple devices then that is very difficult. Does the difficulty arise from trying to keep multiple nodes synchronized, serialize events, or ??? Finding a way to parallelize the handling of a solar system seems like a fascinating challenge with a huge payoff if you can make it work. With the way Intel keeps managing to cram more cores into every cpu generation yet not significantly increasing the execution speed of single threads it just begs you to spread the work load around. This comes up all the time and answer is the same. Difficulty comes from the fact that eve is single threaded. It would have to be rewritten to support multi-threading. Multi-threading is not the silver-bullet you are looking for. Big fights often happen in a single grid where everyone and their drones are affecting everyone else (and their drones). This is a lot of shared state, synchronization and thread communication were it to be multi-threaded. Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Senior Development Director | EVE Online // CCP Games | @erlendur |
|
Sales Alt negrodamus
SalesAltCorp
7
|
Posted - 2014.09.15 20:41:00 -
[86] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:Sales Alt negrodamus wrote:Explorer, just out of curiosity, how big are the technical hurdles to hosting a single eve system on multiple physical devices (read: cluster)? In terms of hosting the simulation itself (both the physics simulation and the damage simulation) on multiple devices then that is very difficult.
Eh, worth a thought.
Personally I think a lot of milage is to be gained by going to multithreading and then to a cluster. The work required to do that would probably make it possible to do on the fly (dynamic!) node reinforcement which would be Neat(tm).
Generally though it seems like you guys are fighting a losing battle. I don't know what the interaction scaling is for all the crap that goes on in a node during a big battle, but I hear O(n^2) often enough that I'll take that at face value.
You got two choices with a problem like that. You can either throw more computational resources at it (multi-threading, clusterization, etc) or you can make n smaller. It seems you guys are going down the 'less crap to compute' route with doing stuff like brain in the box (progress on that? sounds neat), reduction of drone interactions, weapon and eventually drone (?) grouping, etc.
|
|
CCP Explorer
C C P C C P Alliance
2376
|
Posted - 2014.09.15 20:47:00 -
[87] - Quote
Locke DieDrake wrote:Sales Alt negrodamus wrote:Explorer, just out of curiosity, how big are the technical hurdles to hosting a single eve system on multiple physical devices (read: cluster)? The game code was made before multi-core/MPP systems became the standard hosting paradigm. Meaning, in order for EVE to run on a single solar system on multiple pieces of hardware (IE: clustering) they would have to rewrite a great deal of the base code. Something they have been utterly unwilling to do. See POS code, corp code, basically every major issue with the game... it starts right here. You are very conveniently ignoring Crime Watch and Industry that we very recently revamped. Before that we replaced the network layer, moved the database to 64 bits, implemented Time Dilation, moved load from the simulation nodes into speclized nodes such as the Character Service nodes, worked on various improvements to the rendering performance. In addition to general development of new and improved features. Even if we haven't yet embarked on fixing the areas you are most concerned with then you can't use that to generalize that we are "utterly unwilling" to improve the game when it entails rewriting significant parts of the base code.
Also, TQ is a cluster. It's approx. 60 blades hosting 248 nodes (with further 10 blades hosting 47 traffic routing proxies (that also have some logic)). There are specialized nodes within the cluster for the market, for corp. and alliance processing, for all services relating to characters, for planetary interaction, etc, etc. Most of the nodes host simulation, which is primarily the physics simulation, the damage calculations and the overall item inventory of the universe. Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Senior Development Director | EVE Online // CCP Games | @erlendur |
|
Sentient Blade
Crisis Atmosphere
1354
|
Posted - 2014.09.15 21:28:00 -
[88] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:You are very conveniently ignoring Crime Watch and Industry that we very recently revamped. Before that we replaced the network layer, moved the database to 64 bits, implemented Time Dilation, moved load from the simulation nodes into speclized nodes such as the Character Service nodes, worked on various improvements to the rendering performance.
It's a fair point, but by contrast these are pieces of low-hanging fruit and with the exception of int64 and tidi are what I would term functional gameplay changes.
To me as a software engineer, the single-threaded nature of the EVE server code is the elephant in the room that everyone knows is, includes it in conversation, but nobody dare not have a glance cast its way. I note I'm a software engineer because I am very much familiar with the feeling of "Touch that, and I might not be seen again for 10 years".
Unfortunately for CCP I get the impression that it's clearly the single biggest cap on the lifetime of the code, as the meta moves towards larger and larger fights it will become more and more important, and no amount of clever trickery or improved processors will get away from it.
At the very least I would have expected a move towards thread-per-grid on a single machine. |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
2888
|
Posted - 2014.09.15 23:44:00 -
[89] - Quote
How about: Thread per pilot? http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Arthur Aihaken
X A X
3802
|
Posted - 2014.09.16 02:16:00 -
[90] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:There are also other things on the table such as drone-swarms where all drones act in a swarm like one drone, this would be similar to the grouped gun system. Given the O(n^2) nature of drones this would significantly reduce load in certain scenarios. This sounds very interesting. Are you able to expand on this at all? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
|
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
2827
|
Posted - 2014.09.16 02:49:00 -
[91] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:There are also other things on the table such as drone-swarms where all drones act in a swarm like one drone, this would be similar to the grouped gun system. Given the O(n^2) nature of drones this would significantly reduce load in certain scenarios. what is the O(n^2) nature of drones? why would a single drone have to iterate through all other objects do do something? I mean this should NEVER be the case. Even the simpelst form of spatial subdivision (like a basic quad tree) would bring this down to logarithmical complexity. Even n-body simulations use tricks to not have exponential complexity at runtime. eve style bounties (done) dust boarding parties imagine there is war and everybody cloaks - join FW |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
2888
|
Posted - 2014.09.16 04:23:00 -
[92] - Quote
Bienator II wrote:CCP Explorer wrote:There are also other things on the table such as drone-swarms where all drones act in a swarm like one drone, this would be similar to the grouped gun system. Given the O(n^2) nature of drones this would significantly reduce load in certain scenarios. what is the O(n^2) nature of drones? why would a single drone have to iterate through all other objects do do something? I mean this should NEVER be the case. Even the simpelst form of spatial subdivision (like a basic quad tree) would bring this down to logarithmical complexity. Even n-body simulations use tricks to not have exponential complexity at runtime. The number of people using drones grows with n. The number of people that need to be informed about what the drones are doing grows with n. Result: n^2. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Magic Crisp
Amarrian Micro Devices Curatores Veritatis Alliance
170
|
Posted - 2014.09.16 07:21:00 -
[93] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:Hard population cap is not the answer; that will become a tactic where the cap will be used to lock people out and avoid a fight. In terms of answers:
- More servers :) Just this week we were preparing RFPs for new hardware, to replace TQ.
- Team Gridlock is continuing on rewriting Dogma and on the Brain-in-a-Box project. There are also other things on the table such as drone-swarms where all drones act in a swarm like one drone, this would be similar to the grouped gun system. Given the O(n^2) nature of drones this would significantly reduce load in certain scenarios.
- The last part is more tricky and the one we would appreciate feedback: How can we spread large fights over multiple systems in such a manner that it's fun for everyone involved? Some sort of a simultaneous mega-objective across multiple systems but only when there are many involved so you could still have single-system fights depending on man-power (we don't want to require people to always have 3000+ pilot fleets). This happened in B-R since there were fights in the staging systems and Titans and fleets were intercepted en route to B-R.
Uhm, multithreading the code? :) Street rumour says you doing singlethreaded processing in the age of multicore architectures. Of course, this is easier said than done, i pretty much know, and this would require shittons of effort and would have the pitfall of even more "side effects". :)
|
|
CCP Explorer
C C P C C P Alliance
2378
|
Posted - 2014.09.16 10:01:00 -
[94] - Quote
Magic Crisp wrote:CCP Explorer wrote:Hard population cap is not the answer; that will become a tactic where the cap will be used to lock people out and avoid a fight. In terms of answers:
- More servers :) Just this week we were preparing RFPs for new hardware, to replace TQ.
- Team Gridlock is continuing on rewriting Dogma and on the Brain-in-a-Box project. There are also other things on the table such as drone-swarms where all drones act in a swarm like one drone, this would be similar to the grouped gun system. Given the O(n^2) nature of drones this would significantly reduce load in certain scenarios.
- The last part is more tricky and the one we would appreciate feedback: How can we spread large fights over multiple systems in such a manner that it's fun for everyone involved? Some sort of a simultaneous mega-objective across multiple systems but only when there are many involved so you could still have single-system fights depending on man-power (we don't want to require people to always have 3000+ pilot fleets). This happened in B-R since there were fights in the staging systems and Titans and fleets were intercepted en route to B-R.
Uhm, multithreading the code? :) Street rumour says you doing singlethreaded processing in the age of multicore architectures. Of course, this is easier said than done, i pretty much know, and this would require shittons of effort and would have the pitfall of even more "side effects". :) There would be benefit from that, yes, but it's not the silver bullet one might think. For example, even if we split up solarsystems onto multiple nodes then big fights very often happen on a single grid, where everyone needs to be informed about everyone else's actions and everyone can potentially affect everyone else. Secondly, even if we perform all damage calculations on the tick we must process them in the order submitted. If you clicked the button first to activate the guns then we must process that in order. Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Senior Development Director | EVE Online // CCP Games | @erlendur |
|
Sentient Blade
Crisis Atmosphere
1354
|
Posted - 2014.09.16 11:23:00 -
[95] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:If you clicked the button first to activate the guns then we must process that in order.
In a world where latency matters, I don't see this being as big of a problem if everything is done on the tick. This would lead to some interesting cases such as a double-knockout but I think the EVE community would be happy with such a setup.
I would imagine this could very much become like a map-reduce problem, where on the tick, multiple threads work on the processing of a given number of ships / elements, and then they are all collated at the end and then the main process goes to work, tots up the amount of damage to each ship, and applies it in 1 chunk. |
Valterra Craven
276
|
Posted - 2014.09.16 14:10:00 -
[96] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:Locke DieDrake wrote:Sales Alt negrodamus wrote:Explorer, just out of curiosity, how big are the technical hurdles to hosting a single eve system on multiple physical devices (read: cluster)? The game code was made before multi-core/MPP systems became the standard hosting paradigm. Meaning, in order for EVE to run on a single solar system on multiple pieces of hardware (IE: clustering) they would have to rewrite a great deal of the base code. Something they have been utterly unwilling to do. See POS code, corp code, basically every major issue with the game... it starts right here. You are very conveniently ignoring Crime Watch and Industry that we very recently revamped. Before that we replaced the network layer, moved the database to 64 bits, implemented Time Dilation, moved load from the simulation nodes into speclized nodes such as the Character Service nodes, worked on various improvements to the rendering performance. In addition to general development of new and improved features. Even if we haven't yet embarked on fixing the areas you are most concerned with then you can't use that to generalize that we are "utterly unwilling" to improve the game when it entails rewriting significant parts of the base code.
All of the examples you used, where any of them entire code structure rewrites? If not, his point still stands. Yes, you guys have made a lot of changes (improvements is frankly subjective here), but it seems to me a vast majority of the changes you guys have undertaken have either been fixes or new features. Industry is a prime example, 80-90% of that patch was completely new things that didn't exist before, either in mechanics or GUI. How was any of that an entire platform rewrite?
|
|
CCP Explorer
C C P C C P Alliance
2378
|
Posted - 2014.09.16 14:58:00 -
[97] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:CCP Explorer wrote:Locke DieDrake wrote:Sales Alt negrodamus wrote:Explorer, just out of curiosity, how big are the technical hurdles to hosting a single eve system on multiple physical devices (read: cluster)? The game code was made before multi-core/MPP systems became the standard hosting paradigm. Meaning, in order for EVE to run on a single solar system on multiple pieces of hardware (IE: clustering) they would have to rewrite a great deal of the base code. Something they have been utterly unwilling to do. See POS code, corp code, basically every major issue with the game... it starts right here. You are very conveniently ignoring Crime Watch and Industry that we very recently revamped. Before that we replaced the network layer, moved the database to 64 bits, implemented Time Dilation, moved load from the simulation nodes into speclized nodes such as the Character Service nodes, worked on various improvements to the rendering performance. In addition to general development of new and improved features. Even if we haven't yet embarked on fixing the areas you are most concerned with then you can't use that to generalize that we are "utterly unwilling" to improve the game when it entails rewriting significant parts of the base code. All of the examples you used, where any of them entire code structure rewrites? If not, his point still stands. Yes, you guys have made a lot of changes (improvements is frankly subjective here), but it seems to me a vast majority of the changes you guys have undertaken have either been fixes or new features. Industry is a prime example, 80-90% of that patch was completely new things that didn't exist before, either in mechanics, GUI, or "balance" changes (aka number tweaking that doesn't involve code). How was any of that an entire platform rewrite? In fact, given a lot of your examples, it seems like you guys want to literally try everything else BEFORE you rewrite old crappy code. Nobody in their right mind goes and rewrites an entire platform at one time. One does this incrementally and all of these examples were entire rewrites of the systems in question. I forgot one of the rewrites in my list since we never talked about it publicly, when we removed the custom Python importer in the summer of 2013. It was needed in the early days of EVE but not anymore. Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Senior Development Director | EVE Online // CCP Games | @erlendur |
|
Valterra Craven
276
|
Posted - 2014.09.16 15:24:00 -
[98] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:Nobody in their right mind goes and rewrites an entire platform at one time.
Well that is definitely true. Other publishers either give up, or release an entirely new game (Lineage -> Linage II) |
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
2829
|
Posted - 2014.09.16 15:44:00 -
[99] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:Bienator II wrote:CCP Explorer wrote:There are also other things on the table such as drone-swarms where all drones act in a swarm like one drone, this would be similar to the grouped gun system. Given the O(n^2) nature of drones this would significantly reduce load in certain scenarios. what is the O(n^2) nature of drones? why would a single drone have to iterate through all other objects do do something? I mean this should NEVER be the case. Even the simpelst form of spatial subdivision (like a basic quad tree) would bring this down to logarithmical complexity. Even n-body simulations use tricks to not have exponential complexity at runtime. The number of people using drones grows with n. The number of people that need to be informed about what the drones are doing grows with n. Result: n^2. its not n^2 unless its very badly implemented. n^2 would be if each drone would have to communicate with each other drone/object. If they don't influence each other they don't have to do that. Regarding client-server communication a drone is like any other object on grid which has to be communicated to the client. Its not peer2peer after all - even in worst case scenario you should never have n^2 complexity in systems like that. eve style bounties (done) dust boarding parties imagine there is war and everybody cloaks - join FW |
Xenuria
The Scope Gallente Federation
954
|
Posted - 2014.09.16 23:20:00 -
[100] - Quote
I still want to see the specs approximate or otherwise of the current TQ infrastructure. CSM 9 Candidate Philanthropist Polymath Savant Hero |
|
Circumstantial Evidence
140
|
Posted - 2014.09.19 03:27:00 -
[101] - Quote
The wiki page linked here has some stats, and several links at the bottom to past dev blogs.
https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Tranquility |
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
210
|
Posted - 2014.09.19 04:32:00 -
[102] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:Hard population cap is not the answer; that will become a tactic where the cap will be used to lock people out and avoid a fight. In terms of answers:
- More servers :) Just this week we were preparing RFPs for new hardware, to replace TQ.
- Team Gridlock is continuing on rewriting Dogma and on the Brain-in-a-Box project. There are also other things on the table such as drone-swarms where all drones act in a swarm like one drone, this would be similar to the grouped gun system. Given the O(n^2) nature of drones this would significantly reduce load in certain scenarios.
- The last part is more tricky and the one we would appreciate feedback: How can we spread large fights over multiple systems in such a manner that it's fun for everyone involved? Some sort of a simultaneous mega-objective across multiple systems but only when there are many involved so you could still have single-system fights depending on man-power (we don't want to require people to always have 3000+ pilot fleets). This happened in B-R since there were fights in the staging systems and Titans and fleets were intercepted en route to B-R.
May I kiss you? |
Boyamin
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
10
|
Posted - 2014.09.19 22:36:00 -
[103] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:There would be benefit from that, yes, but it's not the silver bullet one might think. For example, even if we split up solarsystems onto multiple nodes then big fights very often happen on a single grid, where everyone needs to be informed about everyone else's actions and everyone can potentially affect everyone else. Secondly, even if we perform all damage calculations on the tick we must process them in the order submitted. If you clicked the button first to activate the guns then we must process that in order.
Maybe kit your 60 blades with some expensive GPU's and run the physics of each local node through a bunch of physics oriented shaders - should alleviate the syncing issues, and you'll have CPU left over to crunch the market 0.01 iskers.
|
Barakach
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
207
|
Posted - 2014.09.20 03:39:00 -
[104] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:Max Kolonko wrote:Arthur Pendrag wrote:CCP Explorer wrote:Sales Alt negrodamus wrote:Explorer, just out of curiosity, how big are the technical hurdles to hosting a single eve system on multiple physical devices (read: cluster)? In terms of hosting the simulation itself (both the physics simulation and the damage simulation) on multiple devices then that is very difficult. Does the difficulty arise from trying to keep multiple nodes synchronized, serialize events, or ??? Finding a way to parallelize the handling of a solar system seems like a fascinating challenge with a huge payoff if you can make it work. With the way Intel keeps managing to cram more cores into every cpu generation yet not significantly increasing the execution speed of single threads it just begs you to spread the work load around. This comes up all the time and answer is the same. Difficulty comes from the fact that eve is single threaded. It would have to be rewritten to support multi-threading. Multi-threading is not the silver-bullet you are looking for. Big fights often happen in a single grid where everyone and their drones are affecting everyone else (and their drones). This is a lot of shared state, synchronization and thread communication were it to be multi-threaded.
Maybe you could batch up commands, then process them in parallel, and queuing up new commands into the next batch as the current one is being processed? Depending on the nature of the problem, it could add a hair bit of latency, but increase throughput.
Completely guessing at a problem domain I don't know almost anything about. |
Barakach
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
207
|
Posted - 2014.09.22 12:23:00 -
[105] - Quote
I was told I should drop this in here... So here it is.
"Given the O(n^2) nature of drones"
Is there more information on this? Is this an algorithm where each each drone needs to be compared against every other drone?
I ask because one of my more recent projects at work was an O(nm) where I needed to full cross compare two sizable lists, pretty much like an O(n^2). I'm almost generally interested in problems like this.
pseudocode:
Naive
foreach(n in List1) foreach(m in List2) compare(n,m)
Better cache reuse version
partitionList1 = BreakIntoSmallerCacheFriendlyGroups(List1) partitionList2 = BreakIntoSmallerCacheFriendlyGroups(List2)
foreach(p1 in partitionList1) foreach(p2 in partitionList2) foreach(n in P1) foreach(m in p2) compare(n,m)
In my case, I was able to get a 30% speed up. Of course I used a "parrallel foreach" on the outer loop and did not actually use "foreach". IEnumberables are actually expensive compared to arrays. Nothing like watching a dual socket sexacore Xeon running at 100% trying to crunch a 80k x 100k comparison :-)
We're potentially eyeing up lists of sizes over 1mil each, looking into better ways to prune and categorizes into smaller groups. Anything to weed out knowing if two items should even be comapred with each other. We're now looking into something more like O(nm(1-r)^k), where we want to get r and k and large as possible.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |