Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Eldariel
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 10:19:00 -
[61]
Edited by: Eldariel on 26/01/2004 10:25:52
Quote: Why would they design it to be this bad though ?
Surely they realised that people would amass fleet this large ? Surely they realised that 5000+ people would be online a a single time ?
I mean, was a battle of this size not tested in Beta ?
Not saying they have - just that it is possible. Only the devs know for sure..
Having said that I vaguely remember some dev chats last year where it was implied the design wasn't infinitely scalable at a system level - could be just me imagining it though
Worth noting that lag wasn't bad elsewhere - so 5000+ spread over the universe is fine. Just don't expect to see them all in the same system at the same time anytime soon
The point is it's an assumption that throwing more nodes at it will make the problem go away. It may not ..
|
sutty
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 10:19:00 -
[62]
no a battle of this size was never tested in beta. we didn't even have the servers we are on now in beta
|
ElCoCo
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 10:48:00 -
[63]
Please fix this CCP.
|
Luther Pendragon
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 10:48:00 -
[64]
not infinite scalability, greatest scalibility. I took this to mean that they can dedicate a single node to a single system, rather than one node handling several systems.
But look what I found in the FAQ though:
Quote: 7.3 How is Internet latency handled? Having been designed from its earliest stages specifically as a MMOG, most of the game systems are devised to minimize network traffic and the effects of lag. This high-level approach makes EVE relatively unaffected by Internet latency.
____________________________________ Taggart wants YOU. Join TTi! *waves his hand in your face in the jedi way* |
Eldariel
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 11:05:00 -
[65]
Edited by: Eldariel on 26/01/2004 11:06:27
Quote: not infinite scalability, greatest scalibility. I took this to mean that they can dedicate a single node to a single system, rather than one node handling several systems.
Single node per system would be bad - since the number of supported players would be directly linked to the size of this single box.
I've a feeling they might have it scalable at a region or constellation level, but even then there may be a limit to the no. of nodes in the micro-cluster
|
RagnarH
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 11:17:00 -
[66]
batteling are not wich "team" have more players fighting, it's just who got the better computer and lag the least
This ain't good CCP ! This char is perm banned on forums :S |
Mitram
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 11:35:00 -
[67]
Computer does not matter.
What matters is the server. The server code must be crap. I am sure upgrading hardware will not help at ther server side either. CCP has to reconsider their software design for the server or they have to at least do a performance profiling on their code. I wouldn't be surprised if 99% of the CPU time and real time in the server is consumed by 1-3 functions.
|
Rayvenous
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 11:38:00 -
[68]
The servercode isnŠt that bad compared with other games like AO. But for the scale that EVE is aimed for its way not good enough (or the machines it runs of are just too crappy)
No matter what CCP really needs to do something about it!
|
Mitram
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 11:44:00 -
[69]
Come on.
I can not speak of AO. I have played it only like 2 month.
I can speak of DAoC. There we were fighting with 500-800 people in one zone in visual range and it was quite playable. The gfx was the main problem and not the server.
At first DAoC has big problems too. The zones were crashing if you had more than 500 players in one. But they fixed that lately and now its no problem anymore.
BTW: AO as well as EVE are running on some Windows machines (AO is from Microsoft). Maybe the windows platform is not usable at all as massive multiplayer server platform.
|
Faramir
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 11:47:00 -
[70]
Warping in to the station to fight doesn't work out in these situations. I warped in, waited 3 mins for some graphics but i saw nothing so i warped out again. Nothing changed since e02.
|
|
Harry Stoteles
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 11:51:00 -
[71]
well, it took me about 20 minutes to jump into YZ .... 20 minutes
Then, later on at the station, i got the call that the enemies warped in, so i clicked undock ... after approx 15 minutes 'entering space' i tried to reload, and kept staring on a black screen for another 10 minutes. Thats not even remotely close to the game i thought i'd play here.
|
Rayvenous
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 12:31:00 -
[72]
Quote: Come on.
I can not speak of AO. I have played it only like 2 month.
Quote:
BTW: AO as well as EVE are running on some Windows machines (AO is from Microsoft). Maybe the windows platform is not usable at all as massive multiplayer server platform.
I am sorry but i think you talk about AC (Asherons Call), i am talking about AO (Anarchy Online) which isnŠt from Microsoft.
|
Mitram
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 12:35:00 -
[73]
Yep, I mixed AC with AO. Never player AO but heard a lot of bad things regarding bugs, performance and stability.
|
Zen Later
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 12:45:00 -
[74]
Yes was a momentous event. The only thing even more monumental was the incredibly poor game performance.
|
Christopher Xen
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 12:47:00 -
[75]
yeah the lag was bs, considering we warned ccp there was going to be extreme fighting in that area a few days ago.
|
Gryganne
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 12:49:00 -
[76]
I would like to be able to turn all ship/station/roid 3D models off. Just a triangle for friendly ships and a square for ennemy ones should be more than enough in a tactical battle configuration. Would this be this hard to implement? I don't think so... And it would solve a LOT of problems...
|
Paddyman
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 12:49:00 -
[77]
Well cant really add anything new, lag sucked, grids sucked, waiting that long to have it ruined by forces outside our control sucked...
But cheers to the FA/Evol members for trying to make it fun, regardless if you were just passing through collecting stuff. We were hoping for a good battle as im sure yous were but it wasn't to be.
GL
|
Yama Booshi
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 13:00:00 -
[78]
Edited by: Yama Booshi on 26/01/2004 13:01:10
Quote:
Quote: Well, you all can be pleased by that CCP is currently redoing alot of coding that will allow us to have huge battles with very little or no lag, but as with everything and specially coding of this magnitude it takes time.
SO we have to cope with what we have atm
Whered they say that? And why wasn't it done sooner?:|
From DevChat:
Lotta> HALo^Jones> With the stabilisation of many player based alliances, which active steps are being taken to allow for large fleet class engagements, where the result can be determined without lag being a factor and player enjoyment being increased? Do you expect this to be in the form of dramatically altered code, or extensive server upgrades? Currently the lag can't all be attributed to client side, and if so recode.
hellmar> as we said earlier we are releasing a form of player owned stations hellmar> we expect all large scale fleet battles to move in to the systems container those stations hellmar> we will give these system high load values, so they will be relatively free of other tasks, solving the server part of fleet battles hellmar> on the client side we have made good progress with increasing frame rates hellmar> specially with regards to drones and missiles TomB> drones are getting big time optimisation again hellmar> so next patch will include solid improvements for fleet battles and I look forward to see some videos after that patch :) hellmar> yes the drone optimisation out there already had more to do with the loading of them hellmar> this new drone optimisation is an optimisation of their rendering after they are loaded
Lets hope this will indeed have the desired effect.
|
Lianhaun
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 13:23:00 -
[79]
I was looking over Disco's shoulder to get a feeling of the operation. It wasn't my turn last night :(
Must say, i'm actually happy about it..I probably ended up kicking the computer out of lag frustration.
/emote waves to all the old lads from Bio & SPVD she saw in local
This is not a hijack
|
SirMolle
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 13:37:00 -
[80]
YZ last night at about 1 am servertime, was insanity.
We had 52 Evolution pilots. FE/m0o had 50-60 pilots. FA had ~50 pilots.
Entering into YZ from Z30; 1 minute after jump - nothing 5 minutes after jump - 5 pilots loaded 10 minutes after jump - 35 pilots loaded 15 minutes after jump - 5 people still not left Z30
Grouped at station, 30-40 EVOL holding. FE/M0o warps in; 2-3 first ships arrive, all fine, targeting and starting to fire. Bulkfleet arrives - everything choked. No modules responded, no commands executed. The chat in YZ stopped, no msg's were sent/received. After 10 minutes, my chat exploded with everything typed the last 10 minutes.
Not acceptable.
|
|
Jacob Molari
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 13:51:00 -
[81]
Yes, last night was amazingly bad. You guys warped into our system, and most of us never saw you at the gate... the gate was doing spasms, yet because of lag, most ships managed to warp to the station *still* cloaked. Let me give you an idea of what last night was like on TS (p = pirate):
p1: Gate is activating, get ready everyone! p3: Huh, my tach shield won't come on p5: Multiple jump-ins! p2: Huh, where? p1: Battleship uncloaking, target the battlship! p4: Ship, what ship? p1: pirate 3, get out of there, a KM stream of missles is headed towards you! p3: Huh, what missles? p7: Local just jumped to 144! They are getting through!
Lather, rinse, repeat.
Near as I can tell, and I do have degrees in computer engineering, at a certain point, only selected individuals were receiving steady updates of the tactical situation, everybody else was left out. This would indicate to me a cap on their "round-robin" type method of updating clients. This is empirical observation only.
A few in the M0o/C0w/FE fleet got real time updates, and real-time lag free battle. I think Omnigen said he had no problems... they had normal lock times, normal views etc.
The same had to be true of the Evol fleet, since they were able to take down a BB, and put a hurtin' on 2 of our scorpions... but the server code is not ready for this kind of fleet action.
Anyways, the stress of managing such a large battle with such a disparate assemblage of corps wasn't worth the end result. If something "definitive" had occurred, the stress would have been worth it.
All we have now is an already overloaded system with even more people in it. And as food chains go, it would not surprise me in the least if those corps at war with Evolution and Company wouldn't also head to YZ to get in on the apocolypse that is occurring there.
Which only means more lag, and more lag, and more lag... and more frustration.
|
Viceroy
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 13:53:00 -
[82]
Tough shit!!
Worst lag I ever saw, and i think it was pretty much server side. Horrible, didnt get a target lock at the station for about 3-5 minutes, and my modules didnt activate for another 3-5. Very bad -
|
Beta Vixen
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 14:02:00 -
[83]
Computer system wise, lag fests like this are caused by the inability of the server assigned to this system/constellation/region to handle all the transaction volume presented.
There are two cases -- either the hardware setup is capable of the volume requested and the software lashup is garbage, or the hardware isn't capable of simultaneously serving 150 peeps in the same system.
Anyone who as ever thought about the thousands of simultaneous demands on the servers supporting online banking systems [there are some American banks who have over 10,000 ATMs in their networks, each possibly demanding account information within 60 seconds of each other] knows that the problem can, technically, be solved.
It may simply be that CCP isn't a big enough operation and can't afford the required hardware and software -- in which case we'll all end up playing SWG simply because Sony has the massive server ability required.
I'm aware this is pretty sad commentary. Not sure what I can do aside from dropping EVE.
**** I'm free! I'm free!! **** Imagination comes before Accomplishment.
|
Estios
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 14:08:00 -
[84]
Sorry to hear it wasnt as fun as something of that magnitude should have been.
Considered heading up but learnt weeks ago that such large battles simply cannot be performed in EVE at present.
Still you could have run LogServer to help GM's out So HMV consider Andy Williams and Dean Martin to be "easy listening" do they? Tell that to my mate Dave, he's been deaf for 20 years.
|
Skaz
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 14:19:00 -
[85]
Edited by: Skaz on 26/01/2004 14:20:37 As much as I dislike handing the PvP lobbyists a tool (Remember, an empty barrel sounds the loudest)
This has to be remedied, This game is called a massively multiplayer, I mean it's massive but the lag issue has been around since Beta, this isn't anything new, and if CCP did predict an increasing number of players (according to the dev blog) then they must have been able to see this coming, right?
I think it's not an unexpected problem, this is a flaw in the design, or else they'd fix it in a jiffy.
Either they're redesigning the entire setup or not willing to fix this problem because of the labor and complexity. This problem though they won't find a way around (compared to the JIP lag)
"No, I'm not alt.....even if I have been in Pator Tech School for 2 years..." |
Mon Mothma
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 14:27:00 -
[86]
is it possible to have a such a large scale battle without problems? is there any other online game which has large scale fights without lag...i cant think of one
hope it can be sorted tho
|
Lagar
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 14:30:00 -
[87]
yer but surly even you M0o got to be bored of the lag? i mean 100 ships in the same system would ruin your fun hunting them if you laged as much as they do... it hurt's both sides of the law..
|
Jacob Molari
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 14:39:00 -
[88]
Edited by: Jacob Molari on 26/01/2004 14:40:44 Mon Motha,
A week prior we had around a 50-60 BS fight with FA, and the lag was all but non-existant.
Everyone got on to the forums and congratulated CCP.
But in this fight we had a 49 ship M0o+FE+friends fleet engaging two separate fleets, an FA fleet of still undetermined size that was repulsed at the gate, and then the Evolution fleet of about 30-35 ships at the station.
All in all, about 120 ships total. More than twice what was involved in the previous weeks fight.
As EVE grows, so will the combat. CCP must look into this.
And this is normally resolvable by using larger servers (rather than cheaper) on the server side. Those ATM systems all go back eventually to mainframe class UNIX/MVS boxes... multi-million dollar machines designed to handle volume. I surmise that CCP went the cheap route, lots and lots of Wintel boxes... and this is what you get.
|
Mitram
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 15:10:00 -
[89]
I suggest that CCP tries to tune the server for 100 via 100 battles. (Or to be safe for the near feature 150 via 150 battles)
|
Eldariel
|
Posted - 2004.01.26 15:17:00 -
[90]
Edited by: Eldariel on 26/01/2004 15:21:52
Actually Oracle corp (RL - not in-game ) is heavily pushing the latter approach (i.e. wintel cheap boxes running linux, loads of redundancy, but a lot of them) with grid computing
If correctly designed (from an application and an architecture perspective) a grid of small boxes can theoretically be much better than one big box. Getting it right from the outset is pretty difficult though - quite easy to miss potential bottlenecks during design, which is probably whats happening here
To be fair I've yet to see a MMORPG that didn't have issues with lag and/ or slowdown (whether client or server side) when large numbers of players congregated in a single area or zone. Most just bounce you to a different zone/ area when the load gets too high
Odd though - the fact not all are lagged makes it sounds like a load balancing issue - i.e. not distributing load across all nodes correctly. If so it may be "relatively" easy to fix
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |