Assembly Hall

Repeat. CCP dont want directional scanner spamming every two seconds.
This idea is bad.

Not supported.

Love your enthusiasm, but this is one of the reasons I oppose this idea.

Repeat. CCP dont want directional scanner spamming every two seconds. (That's why they changing the Dscanner delays to 2.5 seconds)
This idea is bad and delayed local too. No more cloaking boost.

Not supported.

Are there any other MMOs where losses matter to the same degree as well?

I made absolutely no statements in support of, or in opposition to, any statement. I made a question.

So I have been going over the math a bit (in EFT so this might not be totally accurate to the game).

Let's say you got rid of the 10 seconds it takes to run the system scanner to find a haven, because it's annoying.

OK so your average ship has a warp speed of 3 AU / s. And if we assume the average warp from a gate to a belt or ratting site is 30 AU. That's 10 seconds from entering a system to landing on grid.

Then we could pad that a little bit for aligning and landing. Say 3 seconds to scan down a site, align, and warp to it. Then another 3 seconds t land on grid and target someone. Now we are up to 16 seconds.

Now let's give the defender 3 seconds of warning time to notice the hostile, align, and warp out. Back down to 13 seconds.

So assuming my numbers are correct (they aren't). A fair amount of time for someone to have a 50/50 shot of safing up when they see someone in the new intel tool is about 13 seconds.

Then you could adjust that detection time upward and downward from that initial fair time of 13 seconds based on based on the sensor strength of the detecting ships, the signature radius of the detected ship, their distance in AU from one another, and any other in game stats that were appropriate.

Granted I am sure 13 seconds is a little inaccurate, it might be worth going on the test server and using a stop watch while warping to different sites.



And now for a networking traffic tutorial.

The current D scan sends a query to the server whenever you press the D-scan button. That's why doing it more than once every 2 seconds bogs down the server.

For a new intel tool the server could just pipe all the relevant information to the users client once when they enter system, then a little bit here and there whenever something in local changes, people logging on or off, docking and undocking, and jumping in and out of system. Then the client would handle all the intel tool math and feed you info (as per game mechanics) based on local data and wouldn't have to query the server every 2 seconds for you to press the D-scan button.

Also an intel tool that makes you press a button every 2 seconds is dumb. That stuff should happen automatically.

Actually, the reason it was tuned down to a minimum of 2 second delay, was because of bots. The average CPU usage pr person went down noticeably when that was implemented, because the dscan was something bots used extensively.

Wow the pro Local Intel crowd really are grasping at straws. Now I'll certainly concede there may be particular issues with my proposal that need to be addressed, some already have been in the course of this thread, but the whole 'DScan would cause massive network lag so we have to keep things as they are' argument borders on the ridiculous.

Thanks for finally providing a link TravelBuoy, however, the link didn't show CCP saying the same thing as you were stating, merely that they didn't want players updating DScan more frequently than 2 seconds. Well, guess what I'm not suggesting DScan be able to be updated faster than 2 seconds either.

An automated system doesn't mean it has to update constantly. In fact my suggestion for DScan was that it would operate based on three perimeters, Scan Range, Scan Angle, and Frequency of Scan, with more of one meaning less of another. Meaning at max range and a max Scan Angle of 360 the frequency DScan would update would be very slow. At max frequency speed it would be covering a small area of space.

Now in regard to any of this causing network lag, that's an issue of CCP fixing their code, because crappy code shouldn't be an excuse for holding onto crappy gameplay mechanics.

Man, the dscan was instantly before patch which is changed to 2 sec. The CCP said same things what Travelbuoy linked:

"CCP Atlas: "There is a new 2 second delay in using the directional scanner. This has been done for server performance reasons."

Everyone can understand this who want. You just trying to evade.

"An automated system doesn't mean it has to update constantly" That's mean update to everyone and send automatically all data from server to all client which connected the server.
Sometimes this means 40-50k players. This is at least 10x times more data queries. So, you wrong again.

Delayed local not supported. And this is just the one problem but not the last one.

Ok, but your question was in response to a particular statement made by me that you quoted.

I said "there is no MMO that I have played where stealth/sneaky gameplay is weaker than it is in EVE."

then you quoted that and said "Are there any other MMOs where losses matter to the same degree as well?"

That to me implies you accept my statement as true, but consider it a reasonable state justified by your rhetorical question that followed. Maybe it would be best if you simply clarified what exactly it is you're trying to say.