These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Tears aside was HeD the biggest?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#61 - 2014-01-23 08:42:05 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
Look kid im not automatically against you because you are CFC. I really could care less who you are with. You are nullbear and I am a carebear. So really it doesn't matter who we work for. My groups name is cooler than your groups name! so deal with it.

Fact is you could barely squeeze people into fights a few years ago...then poof Tidi became a thing and you could fit 4K and before CCP updated their hardware in like 2009 you couldn't even jump 100 dudes through a gate together without DCing.

The fact you and all your friends have stormed to the forums to complain is actually shocking. I didn't expect 4 days of different complaint threads. This is a new level of suck. Even CFC leadership admits it was there mistake that caused that to happen...did the line members not get the memo?

If the servers were such a huge issue it wouldn't be just CFC complaint threads it would be all of nullsec complaining. While there is always room for improvement the fact CCP was able to accommodate nearly 4K people into a playable environment is very impressive. Not only does it show that they care about providing that content, but that they care about improving it as well...otherwise the Jita Node wouldn't have been used in support.

Frankly i think people are just tired of the constant whine out of nullsec. All of you are whining about something. You blame Sov on CCP when there are literally thousands of systems to accomodate your 80K numbers. yet you all blob for one timer. Thats not CCP that is the lot of you. Did you know 7 fleets of 250 dudes can harass 7 systems at the same time. and that 14 fleets of 125 can do 14.

You guys are doing this to the server not CCP.

Its like -A- General Gree said. "If the node crashes we still win."

But the node didn't crash and here we 4 days worth of CFC and RUS tears.....

But do go on...I would love to hear the experienced opinion of a member of Space Monkeys Alliance.
Shockingly, people do complain, all the time. You are acting like nobody has spoken of how boring Tidi is before. Dragging what should be a half hour battle into a 6 hour wait is not fun. Honestly, it was better when we couldn't fight like that, since at least we didn't try.
And the realism is, they can fix it. Technology to fix it already exists, they just won't leverage it. If they don;t want to fix it, then they should change the game so blobbing is no longer a thing, but they won't fix that either, even though people from all sides have been begging for sov mechanics to be changed for years. Sure, you can split into multiple fleets, but timers mean your enemy can know exactly when and where you will be, thus can blob you, and they will too, since it works. Or did you think that showing up with only 125 people would mean the other side decides to have an honourable battle instead?

And FYI, it's wasn't playable. Half of those players spent their time waiting for the server to finally respond to them before either realising they were already dead or turning back, if it ever responded. Even on the PL/N3 side, if you look at what they are actually saying about it (perhaps not so publicly on the forum) it was boring for them too. Most of them were doing something else all day occasionally responding to commands from comms.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Prince Kobol
#62 - 2014-01-23 10:14:12 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
Lucas, A lot of people have posted threads about why they think Eve should be completely re-written to take advantage of all the new technologies since its inception, multi core processors for example, however they have constantly been shot down and mocked, most of the times your fellow Goons.

The fact is to completely to rewrite a program like Eve will be a very long and very complex job that would tie up considerable resources for it to be done in a acceptable period of time.

Resources that CCP do not have.

If you had a better understanding of the complexities and costs involved you wouldn't talk about it like its a five minute job.
I know full well it's not a five minute job (and have stated that countless times), but then neither is writing in the masses of workarounds to get around the issue. At the end of the day they need to either fix the issue, or scrap fleet battles. Realistically their base code should have been refactored as they went along, then they wouldn't be in this situation.

It's easy to say "it's too much work, we don't want to do it" but then what's the alternative? Stay on a single threaded architecture for eternity? Processors aren't going to suddenly start stepping up in clock speeds at a high rate any time soon, and EVE will continue to grow. The sooner they realise that the change is inevitable, the sooner they can stop building in workarounds and work on the solution, and the less they will have to work back out later.

EDIT: Oh and the whole EVE 2.0 ideas usually come with "yeah and a new server!" which is usually why they get mocked.


Who says that they are not re-working their code base?

Again you are showing how little understanding you have on the subject.

Another point, CCP are making tremendous strides in allowing larger and larger fleet battles to occur.

Even if CCP decided to spend millions of dollars / Euros / Pounds on total re-write of the code base, it will still not solve the problem because they will never be to support unlimited amount of ships on grid without TiDI or Lag.

So the question is, do they continue making slow but steady progress in this area which still allows them to create new expansions and slowly increase the number of pilots to fight at the same time on those few occasions or do they throw everything they have at a total re-write thus having little other resource to do anything else to solve a unsolvable problem?
Arsine Mayhem
Doomheim
#63 - 2014-01-23 12:53:01 UTC
Galphii wrote:
The fleets in system should have been very much aware of how many players were present, and always need to be mindful of the limits of technology.

Another factor is the time it takes to get people into a big fight like this - not as much as it used to. Faster warp speeds on cyno ships allow the growing population of eve to converge on these massive fights much easier than ever before. Hell, a few weeks back I grabbed a 'ceptor with the intent on some KM whoring on a big nullsec fight and made the 30ish jumps to the combat site very quickly indeed. If they wanted to, all the players of eve could train for interceptors and do the same, crashing the node every time.

It is unreasonable to expect the server to be able to handle that many on one node for the foreseeable future, therefore the solution involves spreading out objectives (constellation sov perhaps) and taking steps to keep fights more localised (reducing range on jump drives etc)


And they know that. But their intention was to crash the node. Simple as that.
Arsine Mayhem
Doomheim
#64 - 2014-01-23 13:02:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Arsine Mayhem
knobber Jobbler wrote:
Plastic Psycho wrote:
hedge betts Shiyurida wrote:
CCP needs to see more of these big fights before they can fix issues. If they asked for it and offered full reimbursement for losses, it could go a long way to sorting things out

Why should they re-emburse? The node stayed up, and it was Goons' attempt to crash the node/welping their dreds into the bubbles at close range that cost them so badly.

Seems to me that the Goons earned their losses.


The intended idea was to kill the other fleet. Sadly it was impossible. You guys who come up with these crack pot theories conveniently ignore the fact that if one side puts 1000 carriers and dreads with supercaps for logistics and titan support in a system with a timer, the opposing side needs to counter that or lose sov. Or should sov battles now be decided by the side who gets ships in system first? Which is how things will now work.

Try thinking before posting.


Um, no, you dropped 2800 ships, on the same grid as N3/PL's 900. They had more on standby to bring in.

Goon are the one that blobed the node into being unplayable. Cause it takes 3 and 4 to 1 goon suck to take anyone else on.

N3/PL represent the best, most admirable players in the gaming industry.

Goon hide behind 54 thousand players and growing because they know they are the worst gamer's all gathered into one lamer gamer organization.

Goon are what is wrong with this server and game, and CCP can not do anything about out of game alliances.
Plastic Psycho
Necro-Economics
#65 - 2014-01-23 19:10:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Plastic Psycho
knobber Jobbler wrote:
Plastic Psycho wrote:
hedge betts Shiyurida wrote:
CCP needs to see more of these big fights before they can fix issues. If they asked for it and offered full reimbursement for losses, it could go a long way to sorting things out

Why should they re-emburse? The node stayed up, and it was Goons' attempt to crash the node/welping their dreds into the bubbles at close range that cost them so badly.

Seems to me that the Goons earned their losses.


The intended idea was to kill the other fleet. Sadly it was impossible. You guys who come up with these crack pot theories conveniently ignore the fact that if one side puts 1000 carriers and dreads with supercaps for logistics and titan support in a system with a timer, the opposing side needs to counter that or lose sov. Or should sov battles now be decided by the side who gets ships in system first? Which is how things will now work.

Try thinking before posting.

You should follow your own advice.

If you blob-out the node, or make a rookie tactical call and lose yourself a few hundred dreds, you're going to fail your purpose also - Which, indeed, you did. The only correct response in this case was to put *enough* in-system to start pinning N3/PL's ears back, then re-enforce in sequence as losses dictate.

Instead, y'all Leeroy'd into a massive self-initiated ambush, and paid the price.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#66 - 2014-01-23 21:53:37 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
Who says that they are not re-working their code base?

Again you are showing how little understanding you have on the subject.

Another point, CCP are making tremendous strides in allowing larger and larger fleet battles to occur.

Even if CCP decided to spend millions of dollars / Euros / Pounds on total re-write of the code base, it will still not solve the problem because they will never be to support unlimited amount of ships on grid without TiDI or Lag.

So the question is, do they continue making slow but steady progress in this area which still allows them to create new expansions and slowly increase the number of pilots to fight at the same time on those few occasions or do they throw everything they have at a total re-write thus having little other resource to do anything else to solve a unsolvable problem?
Uh, they have said they are not working on it, several times. Honestly mate I can't really be arsed to get into a long drawn out discussion on the subject, but essentially they have said in the past that they are not reworking it, they are going to just find ways to move some parts out, like biab, but that simply doesn't have long term effective results.

And they don;t need to support unlimited amounts, they just need to be able to get ahead of the players needs, which at the moment they can't since they are at a dead stop. It's not like this problem is new. And tidi is not a solution, it's more of a problem. I don't think anyone can honestly say that a fight in tidi is fun.

As for expansions, honestly, I'd rather see more progress in performance than tinkering around with a handful of mobile structures and the like. And don;t get me wrong, they wouldn't have to rewrite the code base, that would simply be the best long term solution. If they can rework sov mechanics, like has been begged for for years, that could go a long way to discouraging blob fights. But they want to have their cake and eat it to, they want to have huge fights, but not put in what's needed to support them.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#67 - 2014-01-23 21:58:03 UTC
Arsine Mayhem wrote:
knobber Jobbler wrote:
Plastic Psycho wrote:
hedge betts Shiyurida wrote:
CCP needs to see more of these big fights before they can fix issues. If they asked for it and offered full reimbursement for losses, it could go a long way to sorting things out

Why should they re-emburse? The node stayed up, and it was Goons' attempt to crash the node/welping their dreds into the bubbles at close range that cost them so badly.

Seems to me that the Goons earned their losses.


The intended idea was to kill the other fleet. Sadly it was impossible. You guys who come up with these crack pot theories conveniently ignore the fact that if one side puts 1000 carriers and dreads with supercaps for logistics and titan support in a system with a timer, the opposing side needs to counter that or lose sov. Or should sov battles now be decided by the side who gets ships in system first? Which is how things will now work.

Try thinking before posting.


Um, no, you dropped 2800 ships, on the same grid as N3/PL's 900. They had more on standby to bring in.

Goon are the one that blobed the node into being unplayable. Cause it takes 3 and 4 to 1 goon suck to take anyone else on.

N3/PL represent the best, most admirable players in the gaming industry.

Goon hide behind 54 thousand players and growing because they know they are the worst gamer's all gathered into one lamer gamer organization.

Goon are what is wrong with this server and game, and CCP can not do anything about out of game alliances.
Every time someone states these numbers, the N3 force seems to shrink and the Goon force seems to grow. By this time next week N3 would have turned up in a single rookie ship, while goons blobbed 5k people into the system.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Shvak
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#68 - 2014-01-24 07:45:12 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Arsine Mayhem wrote:
knobber Jobbler wrote:
Plastic Psycho wrote:
hedge betts Shiyurida wrote:
CCP needs to see more of these big fights before they can fix issues. If they asked for it and offered full reimbursement for losses, it could go a long way to sorting things out

Why should they re-emburse? The node stayed up, and it was Goons' attempt to crash the node/welping their dreds into the bubbles at close range that cost them so badly.

Seems to me that the Goons earned their losses.


The intended idea was to kill the other fleet. Sadly it was impossible. You guys who come up with these crack pot theories conveniently ignore the fact that if one side puts 1000 carriers and dreads with supercaps for logistics and titan support in a system with a timer, the opposing side needs to counter that or lose sov. Or should sov battles now be decided by the side who gets ships in system first? Which is how things will now work.

Try thinking before posting.


Um, no, you dropped 2800 ships, on the same grid as N3/PL's 900. They had more on standby to bring in.

Goon are the one that blobed the node into being unplayable. Cause it takes 3 and 4 to 1 goon suck to take anyone else on.

N3/PL represent the best, most admirable players in the gaming industry.

Goon hide behind 54 thousand players and growing because they know they are the worst gamer's all gathered into one lamer gamer organization.

Goon are what is wrong with this server and game, and CCP can not do anything about out of game alliances.
Every time someone states these numbers, the N3 force seems to shrink and the Goon force seems to grow. By this time next week N3 would have turned up in a single rookie ship, while goons blobbed 5k people into the system.


My guess is an N3 FC will be quoted next as saying "This is Sparta!" the mighty 300 lol - The way the numbers are dropping this definitely was not the biggest fight in Eve then.
Prince Kobol
#69 - 2014-01-24 07:57:42 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Uh, they have said they are not working on it, several times. Honestly mate I can't really be arsed to get into a long drawn out discussion on the subject, but essentially they have said in the past that they are not reworking it, they are going to just find ways to move some parts out, like biab, but that simply doesn't have long term effective results.

And they don;t need to support unlimited amounts, they just need to be able to get ahead of the players needs, which at the moment they can't since they are at a dead stop. It's not like this problem is new. And tidi is not a solution, it's more of a problem. I don't think anyone can honestly say that a fight in tidi is fun.

As for expansions, honestly, I'd rather see more progress in performance than tinkering around with a handful of mobile structures and the like. And don;t get me wrong, they wouldn't have to rewrite the code base, that would simply be the best long term solution. If they can rework sov mechanics, like has been begged for for years, that could go a long way to discouraging blob fights. But they want to have their cake and eat it to, they want to have huge fights, but not put in what's needed to support them.


They are not working on what, reducing lag.. please tell me you didn't say that because if you are seriously trying to suggest that CCP have said that they are not working on reducing lag it shows you truly have no idea.

I am not even going to continue this line until you clarify what exactly they are no longer working on.

"They just need to get ahead of the players" that simple is it?

Okay.. so tell me, what number would be sufficient to get ahead of the players and how long do you think it would be before we as players break that number.

I mean we can pick a number, let say they need they need to be able to get 10,000 players into a system with no TiDi and lag before everybody will be happy, and its number that we as players will most likely never reach.

I am sure there is a technical solution currently available, but I am also damn sure it is not a economic solution, i.e CCP do not have the budget of a military government department or a Research and Development department belonging to Multinational Billion Dollar company like Microsoft.

CCP are and also have been working on improving performance otherwise we would still be at the same stage we were a year ago, 2 years ago etc

I agree with re-working the Sov Mechanics but like you said, the task is a very difficult on, one hand you want to discouraging blob fighting but on the other you still want to able to generate large scale fights.
I Was There
Habemus
#70 - 2014-01-24 08:42:22 UTC
I remember when 400v400 caused peoples mod to not respond etc etc. Now we're at 2000-3500 man fights. It's not like CCP isn't doing anything to work this issue. But you have to remember; If sov fights worked without problems, more people would join, thus making it lag.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#71 - 2014-01-24 08:59:08 UTC
hedge betts Shiyurida wrote:
CCP needs to see more of these big fights before they can fix issues. If they asked for it and offered full reimbursement for losses, it could go a long way to sorting things out



ITs called test server and they do ask for peopel to do it there 3-4 time sper year.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Aineko Macx
#72 - 2014-01-24 10:39:43 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
HED peaked at like 3600 or something

3900. I was there. Not sure I saw it break 4K tho.
Forum Clone 77777 wrote:
EVE works in 100ms ticks.

No, it runs with 1 second ticks.

Now please carry on with the discussion about how CFCRUS shot themselves in the foot with Goon tactics.

iveeCore 3.0: The PHP engine for industrial activities and CREST library
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#73 - 2014-01-25 16:19:00 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
They are not working on what, reducing lag.. please tell me you didn't say that because if you are seriously trying to suggest that CCP have said that they are not working on reducing lag it shows you truly have no idea.

I am not even going to continue this line until you clarify what exactly they are no longer working on.
Not working on their base code. They've stated that, which means stuff like POS mechanics and the lack of load balancing server architecture is here to stay.

Prince Kobol wrote:
"They just need to get ahead of the players" that simple is it?

Okay.. so tell me, what number would be sufficient to get ahead of the players and how long do you think it would be before we as players break that number.

I mean we can pick a number, let say they need they need to be able to get 10,000 players into a system with no TiDi and lag before everybody will be happy, and its number that we as players will most likely never reach.
Well at the moment people generally break about 4k in a big fight, so they need to be able to support 4k players + their drones. Not necessarily without tidi, but to a degree that you can call what the players do "playing".

Prince Kobol wrote:
I am sure there is a technical solution currently available, but I am also damn sure it is not a economic solution, i.e CCP do not have the budget of a military government department or a Research and Development department belonging to Multinational Billion Dollar company like Microsoft.
In order to get the current performance they have they had to buy military grade components for their server hardware. And it's not like they don't have the developers. They have the time to spend over a year working on biab, and working on expansions to bring us personal mobile structures and ISIS. I'm pretty sure those features aren't exactly creating a boom in subscriptions. I think I opened ISIS once, then removed the icon from my bar never to be looked at again. And the ting is, that the base code will have to be rewritten at some point, it's inevitable. It won't last forever, and simply wasn't designed at the time to be flexible enough to reshape. So why wait until it is critical before doing it? Work on it while subs are already high and people aren't too fed up.

Prince Kobol wrote:
CCP are and also have been working on improving performance otherwise we would still be at the same stage we were a year ago, 2 years ago etc

I agree with re-working the Sov Mechanics but like you said, the task is a very difficult on, one hand you want to discouraging blob fighting but on the other you still want to able to generate large scale fights.
Sure they have, but their rate of increase is not scaling with the requirements of the playerbase, and they've even said it themselves, the hardware industry simply isn't developing in the way the game is designed to scale. And that's not likely to change soon.

Yeah, sov changes are a tricky beast.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Prince Kobol
#74 - 2014-01-25 21:06:06 UTC
damn quote limit lol...

Lucas.. I agree that they have said a number of times that they are working on code that includes PoS's however when it comes to load balancing server architecture, they have and continue to work on it.

By its very nature you have to.

Yes they might not be doing a full re-write of the code, but they will always working on the code and trying to optimise it the best they can.

The problem is as soon as they can support 4k + drones lets say with a agreeable level of TiDi (what acceptable is will always be different for each person) we as players will break it.

The fight in HED is a good example, I am sure if the server allowed we could of hit 4.5k, maybe even 5k of people without too much of an effort.

So then the argument will be they need to support 5k and again we will push/break that limit.

Hey, I am in agreement that when it comes to wasting resources on pointless things, CCP are right up there, however what you and me might class as wasted resources, a 1000 other people might say that they were good things.

I thought the new deployable's were pointless but the numbers show otherwise.

Will the base code need to be re-written at some point, most likely, but as with any company CCP will wait until it becomes an absolute necessity which at the moment it isn't.

You cant put all your resources into something which only effects a small % of the player base for events which only happen a few times a year.

I would love them to, but it doesn't make any sense from any way you look at it.

Again, CCP will never be able to keep the rate of scaling with the player base.

We simply are too fast, too quick to take any advantage we can and CCP do not have enough resource to keep up.

Now maybe if they hadn't bothered with DUST it might different but that is another discussion.
ISD Tyrozan
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#75 - 2014-01-26 02:24:15 UTC
Personal attack post removed.

ISD Tyrozan

Captain

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

@ISDTyrozan | @ISD_CCL
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#76 - 2014-01-26 10:58:02 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
damn quote limit lol...

Lucas.. I agree that they have said a number of times that they are working on code that includes PoS's however when it comes to load balancing server architecture, they have and continue to work on it.

By its very nature you have to.

Yes they might not be doing a full re-write of the code, but they will always working on the code and trying to optimise it the best they can.
True, but since the language they are using has core limitations, they will always be bound by them, making optimisation more difficult. You have to weigh up if it's better to change the core, making later optimisations considerably easier or keep optimising on top of those limitations. In most scenarios and with the longevity of the game, it would be better to be inconveniences more but once than ongoing difficulties.

Prince Kobol wrote:
The problem is as soon as they can support 4k + drones lets say with a agreeable level of TiDi (what acceptable is will always be different for each person) we as players will break it.

The fight in HED is a good example, I am sure if the server allowed we could of hit 4.5k, maybe even 5k of people without too much of an effort.

So then the argument will be they need to support 5k and again we will push/break that limit.
Possibly. The needs of the players has accelerated faster than the optimisations though, and if that continues it will only get worse. If they went all out and recoded the core of the server, not only would it provide an immediate boost, but it would make later optimisations easier to implement.

Prince Kobol wrote:
Will the base code need to be re-written at some point, most likely, but as with any company CCP will wait until it becomes an absolute necessity which at the moment it isn't.

You cant put all your resources into something which only effects a small % of the player base for events which only happen a few times a year.

I would love them to, but it doesn't make any sense from any way you look at it.
These fights are becoming more common, and there will definitely be more to come. Major press gets generated when these fights occur and actually succeed, so it's already in there best interest to make sure people are reading "big fight happened" rather than "server took 3 hours to respond"

Prince Kobol wrote:
Again, CCP will never be able to keep the rate of scaling with the player base.

We simply are too fast, too quick to take any advantage we can and CCP do not have enough resource to keep up.

Now maybe if they hadn't bothered with DUST it might different but that is another discussion.
Well we can only hope they find the resource before it gets to the point that people start dropping at a high rate. I've played MMOs in the past where they put features ahead of stability, most notably Neocron, and once they went past the tipping point, nothing was able to stop the population dropping, even when they started fixing the issues.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld
#77 - 2014-01-26 11:17:15 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
damn quote limit lol...

Lucas.. I agree that they have said a number of times that they are working on code that includes PoS's however when it comes to load balancing server architecture, they have and continue to work on it.

By its very nature you have to.

Yes they might not be doing a full re-write of the code, but they will always working on the code and trying to optimise it the best they can.
True, but since the language they are using has core limitations, they will always be bound by them, making optimisation more difficult. You have to weigh up if it's better to change the core, making later optimisations considerably easier or keep optimising on top of those limitations. In most scenarios and with the longevity of the game, it would be better to be inconveniences more but once than ongoing difficulties.

Prince Kobol wrote:
The problem is as soon as they can support 4k + drones lets say with a agreeable level of TiDi (what acceptable is will always be different for each person) we as players will break it.

The fight in HED is a good example, I am sure if the server allowed we could of hit 4.5k, maybe even 5k of people without too much of an effort.

So then the argument will be they need to support 5k and again we will push/break that limit.
Possibly. The needs of the players has accelerated faster than the optimisations though, and if that continues it will only get worse. If they went all out and recoded the core of the server, not only would it provide an immediate boost, but it would make later optimisations easier to implement.

Prince Kobol wrote:
Will the base code need to be re-written at some point, most likely, but as with any company CCP will wait until it becomes an absolute necessity which at the moment it isn't.

You cant put all your resources into something which only effects a small % of the player base for events which only happen a few times a year.

I would love them to, but it doesn't make any sense from any way you look at it.
These fights are becoming more common, and there will definitely be more to come. Major press gets generated when these fights occur and actually succeed, so it's already in there best interest to make sure people are reading "big fight happened" rather than "server took 3 hours to respond"

Prince Kobol wrote:
Again, CCP will never be able to keep the rate of scaling with the player base.

We simply are too fast, too quick to take any advantage we can and CCP do not have enough resource to keep up.

Now maybe if they hadn't bothered with DUST it might different but that is another discussion.
Well we can only hope they find the resource before it gets to the point that people start dropping at a high rate. I've played MMOs in the past where they put features ahead of stability, most notably Neocron, and once they went past the tipping point, nothing was able to stop the population dropping, even when they started fixing the issues.


That's all well and good but only 10% of the playerbase play in null, so we're not exactly a priority to CCP

Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction...
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#78 - 2014-01-26 11:41:32 UTC
A code rewrite is not an automatic 'EVE runs faster'.
A code rewrite is however an automatic 'New bugs'.

It's a huge gamble for potentially negative results to port EVE to a new programming language with no predictable results beyond the introduction of new bugs in the rewrite. Some of EVE might even break due to interdependencies that have strange effects under a new coding system.

As well as Devs no longer being familiar with the language and how to get the most leverage out of it, instead having to learn all the tiny tips & tricks of a new language.

So.... Yea. Not seeing them ever doing a code base rewrite unless python stops being developed/supported.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#79 - 2014-01-26 17:49:51 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
A code rewrite is not an automatic 'EVE runs faster'.
A code rewrite is however an automatic 'New bugs'.

It's a huge gamble for potentially negative results to port EVE to a new programming language with no predictable results beyond the introduction of new bugs in the rewrite. Some of EVE might even break due to interdependencies that have strange effects under a new coding system.

As well as Devs no longer being familiar with the language and how to get the most leverage out of it, instead having to learn all the tiny tips & tricks of a new language.

So.... Yea. Not seeing them ever doing a code base rewrite unless python stops being developed/supported.
Well that's not quite right. It's not automatically new bugs, and while it's not an automatic "eve runs faster" it does remove their processor cap that they are currently sitting at. They are at the limit of how fast a CPU core can go. There's nothing in the industry to grant them more power from a core. While a rewrite wouldn't make it automatically faster, it certainly would give them a lot more options to spread out the load.

By the way, most senior programmers can write a range of languages, and adapt to new ones in a pretty short time.

And sure, they may not rewrite the codebase, but then the amount of power they have no is about the extent of it. They can do tweaks and workarounds like biab, and work with drone AI to make it a bit more streamlined, but the rate of the increase in fights size will continue to outrun the rate of performance increase. And TIDI will have to stay, which means fights will remain incredibly boring even when they do run right. I don't think I know anyone that can honestly say they find a TIDI fight a fun experience, and they consider TIDI to be a solution, madness.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
silens vesica
Corsair Cartel
#80 - 2014-01-26 17:57:28 UTC  |  Edited by: silens vesica
Lucas Kell wrote:
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
A code rewrite is not an automatic 'EVE runs faster'.
A code rewrite is however an automatic 'New bugs'.

It's a huge gamble for potentially negative results to port EVE to a new programming language with no predictable results beyond the introduction of new bugs in the rewrite. Some of EVE might even break due to interdependencies that have strange effects under a new coding system.

As well as Devs no longer being familiar with the language and how to get the most leverage out of it, instead having to learn all the tiny tips & tricks of a new language.

So.... Yea. Not seeing them ever doing a code base rewrite unless python stops being developed/supported.


Well that's not quite right. It's not automatically new bugs,

Yeah, it is. ANY time you do non-trivial re-code, there will be new bugs. Which isn't to say that they can't be over-come; they can be.


Quote:
it does remove their processor cap that they are currently sitting at.
Maybe. Maybe not. Probably, but no guarantee. Meanwhile, the *funding* for such a massive undertaking must be found. It's not a cheap OR simple exercise you're asking for. Are you willing to sacrifice new content and patches for a year or so? Will CCP survive the natural user-attrition over time whilst re-doing the code without new content offerings to draw new subs?

It's not a simple thing.

Tell someone you love them today, because life is short. But scream it at them in Esperanto, because life is also terrifying and confusing.

Didn't vote? Then you voted for NulBloc