These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

Reduced server load, Remove AFK players after 2 hours
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
commander aze
#1 - 2013-12-17 04:28:39 UTC
so just going to put this out there, with the expansion in popularity of Eve online and the fact that its likely to grow further I feel that having a server side disconnect after 2 hours of inactivity might be a good idea.

I have other motives but just saying if you are not doing anything but sitting still in station or out then you don't need to be represented in game.

If your not at your computer playing the game then you don't need a connection to the server. I recommend 2 hours as travel times for freighters in high sec might take similar times using auto pilot. and being fair to them would be justifiable. given if they log in before work then leave likely they will make it to their destination then log off.

Commander Aze For CSM XII

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=506400

Support the Community #Broadcast4Reps
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#2 - 2013-12-17 04:32:21 UTC
1. Posting in a stealth nerf AFK cloaking thread.
2. A simple macro to keep your character "active" is simple enough to do.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
commander aze
#3 - 2013-12-17 04:36:13 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
1. Posting in a stealth nerf AFK cloaking thread.
2. A simple macro to keep your character "active" is simple enough to do.


1 This is about server stability not AFK cloaking although would cover people logging in and walking away for the day...
2 Macros I believe are against the EULA

Quote:

CONDUCT
A. Specifically Restricted Conduct

Your continued access to the System and license to play the Game is subject to proper conduct. Without limiting CCP's rights to control the Game environment, and the conduct of the players within that environment, CCP prohibits the following practices that CCP has determined detract from the overall user experience of the users playing the Game.

You may not take any action that imposes an unreasonable or disproportionately large load on the System.
You may not use your own or third-party software to modify any content appearing within the Game environment or change how the Game is played.
You may not use your own or any third-party software, macros or other stored rapid keystrokes or other patterns of play that facilitate acquisition of items, currency, objects, character attributes, rank or status at an accelerated rate when compared with ordinary Game play. You may not rewrite or modify the user interface or otherwise manipulate data in any way to acquire items, currency, objects, character attributes or beneficial actions not actually acquired or achieved in the Game.

Commander Aze For CSM XII

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=506400

Support the Community #Broadcast4Reps
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#4 - 2013-12-17 04:53:09 UTC
they don't take any server resources if they don't do anything. being AFK is good for the hamsters

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
commander aze
#5 - 2013-12-17 04:55:14 UTC
they do hold a connection to the server. causing at least some resources to be held up. even just sitting there.

Commander Aze For CSM XII

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=506400

Support the Community #Broadcast4Reps
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#6 - 2013-12-17 04:58:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
A single client connection is not an unreasonable or disproportionate load on the server. A macro that double-clicks in space every 1.5hrs or presses the enter key once every 1.25hrs does not facilitate acquisition of anything and so would not violate the EULA as worded.

Also, posting in a stealth nerf-AFK-cloaking thread - which means...

There's already a thread to discuss AFK cloaking in. Post there instead of making a new one.

If you actually cared about server stability you'd be posting a thread in Issues & Workarounds about things that actually cause node death instead of ... this.
commander aze
#7 - 2013-12-17 05:19:08 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
A single client connection is not an unreasonable or disproportionate load on the server. A macro that double-clicks in space every 1.5hrs or presses the enter key once every 1.25hrs does not facilitate acquisition of anything and so would not violate the EULA as worded.

Also, posting in a stealth nerf-AFK-cloaking thread - which means...

There's already a thread to discuss AFK cloaking in. Post there instead of making a new one.

If you actually cared about server stability you'd be posting a thread in Issues & Workarounds about things that actually cause node death instead of ... this.


Clearly you don't understand Although yes this would effect afk cloaking it would be more so important to removing players that are not actually playing the game. This would change a whole host of issues... for instance jita local may drop significantly as those the autopilot and sit there wont clog up the system.

just saying my motives might be to reduce traffic related problems when jumping between nodes or being forced to enter game in a different system then you logged off in.

Although I find it interesting that you might say that the EULA doesn't cover this?
" character attributes, rank or status" is also included as the status of online or offline as the rate of entering data absent from a computer is = to 0 an accelerated rate of this would be any number of macro keystrokes over that number.

just saying it depends on how you read it and I believe CCP would say the same.

Commander Aze For CSM XII

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=506400

Support the Community #Broadcast4Reps
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#8 - 2013-12-17 05:33:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
I'm pretty sure you don't get to pull a Fox News and take part of a sentence, remove the context from it and then say it means whatever you want it to mean. When read in its entirety, that particular sentence is pretty obvious about what it means.
commander aze
#9 - 2013-12-17 05:47:42 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
I'm pretty sure you don't get to pull a Fox News and take part of a sentence, remove the context from it and then say it means whatever you want it to mean. When read in its entirety, that particular sentence is pretty obvious about what it means.

yea in that macros are not allowed when they alter the experience of normal gameplay just as miner bots are also not allowed.

Simply put its int he spirit of the game that you need to be active to be playing.

Commander Aze For CSM XII

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=506400

Support the Community #Broadcast4Reps
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#10 - 2013-12-17 05:49:20 UTC  |  Edited by: ShahFluffers
commander aze wrote:
Although I find it interesting that you might say that the EULA doesn't cover this?
" character attributes, rank or status" is also included as the status of online or offline as the rate of entering data absent from a computer is = to 0 an accelerated rate of this would be any number of macro keystrokes over that number.

just saying it depends on how you read it and I believe CCP would say the same.

It's a matter of precedent and known enforcement.


While the EULA does clearly state that Marcos in general are not allowed...

- various CCP GMs and DEVs have often expressed that they try to distinguish between automated and non-automated Macros. That latter is more or less allowed (see: "as long as there is a player behind the keystrokes it is fine").

- CCP has shown that they tend to prioritize who they investigate based on the seriousness/effects of their actions (because they are a small company with limited resources, investigate each petition manually, and dislike using anti-macro software that won't really work in the long run).
For example; a person using an automated Macro to merely stay online would be largely ignored rather than someone who uses the same thing to profit off the market, run belts, or mine (and there are TONS of people who use those).

How did you Veterans start?
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#11 - 2013-12-17 07:23:59 UTC
not to mention, if we have an auto-logof every 2 hours fo AFK, doesnt that mean the server has to keep an active clock for every player and how long they have been online? not saying that would cause lag or anything, but its eating up resources, as well as button clicking to stay online, that means AFK now take up even more space than before, effectively nullifying everything OP wanted.

and on that note, instead of the devs sitting down and trying to discuss and implement a log off timer, why dont we save them the time, let them work on software optimization, and you HTFU.

seriously, this is not even a well disguised "guys i refuse to move systems, even though a mean ol' AFK player is camping my system". if they are AFK, then they cant hurt you, if they arent afk, 2 thinsg ahppen
1) your entire proposition is moot because they arent AFK
2) they die when they try to gank you, because obviously your intelligent enough to not fly completely alone in "dangerous" space.
Endovior
PFU Consortium
#12 - 2013-12-17 07:43:28 UTC
Ignoring the obvious AFK cloaking bit (which, again, should be handled in a different way than this, given how clever players can get around this sort of thing), there probably is a legitimate reason for activity timers. The mention of Jita, in particular, is a good one; it's frequently impossible to enter or log into Jita, and that, in particular, is caused by too many players hanging around in Jita. Naturally, I don't have stats to demonstrate how many of those are AFK, but presuming that there are some amongst the 1000+ people there, I'd certainly rather the server prune some AFKers from Jita as opposed to barring my entry.

That being said, though, I don't really think that people AFK in a station or such really add all that much load to the server, which makes this a low-priority issue at best.
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#13 - 2013-12-17 07:46:14 UTC
So long as an active module counts as 'active'.
NaK'Lin
Seamen Force
#14 - 2013-12-17 07:51:00 UTC
Why are we atlking about the EULA and MACROs now?
Derailing succeded.

about OPs IDEA: -1

Who cares about a macro?!
But a stealth "nerf AFK cloaking" thread disguised as "i care about the well-being of HAL(c)" .... really?

If you cared about server loads you'd point out things that actually make the server go PFFFRRRZZZZT...

As for AFK people, I very much have the right to go afk while sitting in station, not looking at that scree and watch a movie, only to watch it periodically to see if finally receive that mail from the mailing list my trader is waiting for, etc etc.

I could have a million reasons not wanting to log off. and don't worry, we all get kicked of TQ once a day on Downtime anyway. So Whats the deal?! It certainly is not the server load.

So, please show us on the doll where the evil afk cloaker touched you, and maybe we'll be more understanding (or not).
Seranova Farreach
Biomass Negative
#15 - 2013-12-17 12:06:51 UTC
-1. its a stealth "NERF AFK CLOAKERS" thread

[u]___________________ http://i.imgur.com/d9Ee2ik.jpg[/u]
Electrique Wizard
Mutually Lucrative Business Proposals
#16 - 2013-12-17 12:14:46 UTC
Nariya Kentaya wrote:
not to mention, if we have an auto-logof every 2 hours fo AFK, doesnt that mean the server has to keep an active clock for every player and how long they have been online? not saying that would cause lag or anything, but its eating up resources, as well as button clicking to stay online, that means AFK now take up even more space than before, effectively nullifying everything OP wanted.


Exactly this.
Stealth nerf AFK-cloaking thread and has a negative effect on server performance.

I am the Zodiac, I am the stars, You are the sorceress, my priestess of Mars, Queen of the night, swathed in satin black, Your ivory flesh upon my torture rack.
Sarah Stallman
Pen2 Logistics
#17 - 2013-12-17 12:25:01 UTC
The server costs of an AFK player approaches negligible. This change would be annoying and serve no useful purpose.

Also, -1 for stealth nerf.
Sura Sadiva
Entropic Tactical Crew
#18 - 2013-12-17 12:45:01 UTC
I don't think CCP is so impatient for reducing their online players numbers.

Also, these threads waste disk space on the forum database. Stop them.
Salpad
Carebears with Attitude
#19 - 2013-12-17 13:25:40 UTC
commander aze wrote:
If your not at your computer playing the game then you don't need a connection to the server. I recommend 2 hours as travel times for freighters in high sec might take similar times using auto pilot. and being fair to them would be justifiable. given if they log in before work then leave likely they will make it to their destination then log off.


Going from Jita to Rens, 25 jumps, in a Charon with maxed skillz, used to take exactly 120 minutes, before the warp changes.

I haven't re-timed it after the warp changes, but based on my old test, I'd say that yes, your "2 hours of travel times" is very reasonable. Not too harsh, nor overly generous. Freighter AFK'ers rarely need to travel longer than that, and if they do, they'll just have to do it in two legs.
seth Hendar
I love you miners
#20 - 2013-12-17 13:43:19 UTC
Nariya Kentaya wrote:
not to mention, if we have an auto-logof every 2 hours fo AFK, doesnt that mean the server has to keep an active clock for every player and how long they have been online? not saying that would cause lag or anything, but its eating up resources, as well as button clicking to stay online, that means AFK now take up even more space than before, effectively nullifying everything OP wanted.

and on that note, instead of the devs sitting down and trying to discuss and implement a log off timer, why dont we save them the time, let them work on software optimization, and you HTFU.

seriously, this is not even a well disguised "guys i refuse to move systems, even though a mean ol' AFK player is camping my system". if they are AFK, then they cant hurt you, if they arent afk, 2 thinsg ahppen
1) your entire proposition is moot because they arent AFK
2) they die when they try to gank you, because obviously your intelligent enough to not fly completely alone in "dangerous" space.

no, the timer could be hosted client side, and after the XX minutes of complete inactivity, the client would just send a logoff command => no load on server.

this proposal would be great if it was not affecting afk cloacker, wich is i think a good use of game mechanic and holds startegic value
12Next page