These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev Blog: A Weekend of Epic Destruction in EVE Online

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#41 - 2013-01-30 13:46:30 UTC
Madlof Chev wrote:
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
*cough, cough*

*steps in and turns on jerk-o-matic*

Quote:
CCP has focused too much in players whose point is to band with others as that leads to !!Headlines!!, but then it turns that most players play the game for their own reasons and CCP has been making their life miserable or just left them in a corner with only a few toys for years since Apochrypha.


In the last days since I activated a PLEX, I've logged in for two hours, mostly to tinker with my avatar.

Go figure how much !!excited!! i am about whatever the nullsec attention whores did this last weekend. I am seriously thinking about buying one year of subscription in advance just to keep myself informed.

*disengages jerk-o-matic and goes play Planetside 2, aka DUST 514 Lite*


M

M

O

if you want to sit there and play on your own find another game instead of whining incessantly


Huh.

"Woah!! There's 2,800 pilots online in a system batlting each other!"

Sweet, but, may you care to ask what were doing the other 44,000 players online at the same time?

Perspective: It does matter.

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you
riverini
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#42 - 2013-01-30 14:24:54 UTC  |  Edited by: riverini
We stood up til' 2 a.m. live blogging and keeping the site alive, we also threw in a complete summary the next day which harnessed 70,000 pageviews the first 24 hours. Is it worth mentioning that Saturday and Sunday alone, 305 hits came from a network called "ccp hf"...

I know it's hard to "give us love", specially since for years Devs have been told to stay away from us . We are not in the business of "winning ourselves over" to CCP Games to get what ever falls of the table. So, its all ok.

Some of my readers did mentioned if the link between CCP throwing a Dev blog being peppered with TM.com damage control and this whole fight being just a proof that CCP Games actually asked their favorite customers to stage a big fight under the assurance that:

Quote:
Undoubtedly there will be ships returned to pilots that died of a server errors...


I'll just relay the message.

R

p.s.: Off topic, what ever happened to CCP Diagoras? I keep hearing these morbid rumours and i certainly miss his stats updates which suddenly stopped tweeting half a year ago...

RIVERINI / EVENEWS24 @evenews24
Terrorfrodo
Interbus Universal
#43 - 2013-01-30 14:58:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Terrorfrodo
riverini wrote:
p.s.: Off topic, what ever happened to CCP Diagoras? I keep hearing these morbid rumours and i certainly miss his stats updates which suddenly stopped tweeting half a year ago...

Aren't you some kind of journalist? Took me one minute to find the answer to your question: Diagoras left CCP (like in 'left on his own', not 'he was fired')

.
riverini
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#44 - 2013-01-30 15:27:18 UTC
Terrorfrodo wrote:
riverini wrote:
p.s.: Off topic, what ever happened to CCP Diagoras? I keep hearing these morbid rumours and i certainly miss his stats updates which suddenly stopped tweeting half a year ago...

Aren't you some kind of journalist? Took me one minute to find the answer to your question: Diagoras left CCP (like in 'left on his own', not 'he was fired')


Yeah, there is no goggle in my country, so there is no way I could knew that... Roll

RIVERINI / EVENEWS24 @evenews24
Sable Moran
Moran Light Industries
#45 - 2013-01-30 15:40:28 UTC
CCP Explorer wrote:
Sable Moran wrote:
CCP Manifest wrote:
...yet I must set the record straight that this weekend’s battles did not in fact bust DUST 514 connections to the beta. You’ll have to just try harder space pilots!
Oh dear...

You really should not have said that.
Oh, why not? Blink


Mixing Na let alone K and H2O? Usually not that good of an idea.

Sable's Ammo Shop at Alentene V - Moon 4 - Duvolle Labs Factory. Hybrid charges, Projectile ammo, Missiles, Drones, Ships, Need'em? We have'em, at affordable prices. Pop in at our Ammo Shop in sunny Alentene.
S1dy
Uplifting Infernal Paradise
#46 - 2013-01-30 15:43:53 UTC
riverini wrote:
We stood up til' 2 a.m. live blogging and keeping the site alive, we also threw in a complete summary the next day which harnessed 70,000 pageviews the first 24 hours. Is it worth mentioning that Saturday and Sunday alone, 305 hits came from a network called "ccp hf"...

I know it's hard to "give us love", specially since for years Devs have been told to stay away from us . We are not in the business of "winning ourselves over" to CCP Games to get what ever falls of the table. So, its all ok.

Some of my readers did mentioned if the link between CCP throwing a Dev blog being peppered with TM.com damage control and this whole fight being just a proof that CCP Games actually asked their favorite customers to stage a big fight under the assurance that:

Quote:
Undoubtedly there will be ships returned to pilots that died of a server errors...


I'll just relay the message.

R

p.s.: Off topic, what ever happened to CCP Diagoras? I keep hearing these morbid rumours and i certainly miss his stats updates which suddenly stopped tweeting half a year ago...


Though i appreciate your newssite, demanding CCP not promoting you leaves you in a not so serious position. Keep it cool and serious, that's much better in a professional way ;)
Inquisitor Kitchner
The Executives
#47 - 2013-01-30 15:51:21 UTC
Terrorfrodo wrote:
riverini wrote:
p.s.: Off topic, what ever happened to CCP Diagoras? I keep hearing these morbid rumours and i certainly miss his stats updates which suddenly stopped tweeting half a year ago...

Aren't you some kind of journalist? Took me one minute to find the answer to your question: Diagoras left CCP (like in 'left on his own', not 'he was fired')



He's really not a journalist by any real definition of the word don't worry.

"If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared." - Niccolo Machiavelli
riverini
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#48 - 2013-01-30 15:52:30 UTC
Quote:
Though i appreciate your newssite, demanding CCP not promoting you leaves you in a not so serious position. Keep it cool and serious, that's much better in a professional way ;)


I am replying to CCP Manifest to state that CCP Games was aware that I was running the coverage. I won't contest who CCP Games prefers to spotlight, that's their choice to do.

R

RIVERINI / EVENEWS24 @evenews24
Hakaru Ishiwara
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#49 - 2013-01-30 16:34:25 UTC
New Eden could use events like these (*) at least once every quarter.

(*) - where super capital owners and dread naught captains (and their moon lord commanders) put their cocks out on the table and blow their loads. Too often, super capitals are "kept safe" for some future time when they might be theoretically needed. With the amount of super capital ships now in-game AND the resources currently in-hand, it is absurd not to use these massive ships. The current null-sec stagnation is a symptom of this nonsense, IMHO.

tl;dr - we need more of these fights to keep EVE exciting and continue the industrial churn.

+++++++ I have never shed a tear for a fellow EVE player until now. Mark “Seleene” Heard's Blog Honoring Sean "Vile Rat" Smith.
Pohbis
Neo T.E.C.H.
#50 - 2013-01-31 03:49:20 UTC
Quote:
Had we gone this route and moved the system, the Titan and his friends simply wouldn’t have logged back in, killing the fight. So, yea, this just isn’t done.
I might be behind on my supercap warfare lessons, but isn't "logging off" as a supercap under such large firepower leaving you aggressed in space with inactive resist modules, about the last thing a pilot would want to do?

The "we don't do it because people will just not log back in" excuse just doesn't fly CCP. If pilots see it as the best way to escape a fight, they don't have to rely on you doing a real-time node re-inforcement. They can simply, you know, CTRL+Q all by themself Ugh
Besbin
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
#51 - 2013-01-31 12:44:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Besbin
Pohbis wrote:
Quote:
Had we gone this route and moved the system, the Titan and his friends simply wouldn’t have logged back in, killing the fight. So, yea, this just isn’t done.
I might be behind on my supercap warfare lessons, but isn't "logging off" as a supercap under such large firepower leaving you aggressed in space with inactive resist modules, about the last thing a pilot would want to do?

The "we don't do it because people will just not log back in" excuse just doesn't fly CCP. If pilots see it as the best way to escape a fight, they don't have to rely on you doing a real-time node re-inforcement. They can simply, you know, CTRL+Q all by themself Ugh


To be fair...and using a bit of common sense... If they change the node, they change the whole node and there's no such thing as fancy log off mechanisms leaving some people in system and throwing others off. Everybody goes off since there's no damn hardware to keep anyone or anything in. They can save the data state and restore the exact same state once the new node is up, but no changes can be made to this data while the node is down (since, you know, there's no node available to change the data state) and as such nobody can shoot anybody. After the node has been restored, the connections have to be reestablished, and for this they need players to log back in. So I sincerely doubt the scenario you're listing to be relevant.

Just, you know, to be fair :-)

With that said and done, it would of course not be conceptually impossible to switch the player connections to a standby state on another node, restore the data in a modified state (some kind of exception handling for connections broken while in standby...the straight forward modification being the same as the one instated by a Ctrl+Q) and leave it up to the sandbox to deal with the situation on the restored node (meaning players who disconnect while on standby are making themselves susceptible to being left in space as per normal rules). However, all this would demand programming that the present system most certainly can't handle and as such takes ressources and time.

Common sense ftw.
riverini
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#52 - 2013-01-31 14:58:56 UTC
Besbin wrote:
Pohbis wrote:
Quote:
Had we gone this route and moved the system, the Titan and his friends simply wouldn’t have logged back in, killing the fight. So, yea, this just isn’t done.
I might be behind on my supercap warfare lessons, but isn't "logging off" as a supercap under such large firepower leaving you aggressed in space with inactive resist modules, about the last thing a pilot would want to do?

The "we don't do it because people will just not log back in" excuse just doesn't fly CCP. If pilots see it as the best way to escape a fight, they don't have to rely on you doing a real-time node re-inforcement. They can simply, you know, CTRL+Q all by themself Ugh


To be fair...and using a bit of common sense... If they change the node, they change the whole node and there's no such thing as fancy log off mechanisms leaving some people in system and throwing others off. Everybody goes off since there's no damn hardware to keep anyone or anything in. They can save the data state and restore the exact same state once the new node is up, but no changes can be made to this data while the node is down (since, you know, there's no node available to change the data state) and as such nobody can shoot anybody. After the node has been restored, the connections have to be reestablished, and for this they need players to log back in. So I sincerely doubt the scenario you're listing to be relevant.

Just, you know, to be fair :-)

With that said and done, it would of course not be conceptually impossible to switch the player connections to a standby state on another node, restore the data in a modified state (some kind of exception handling for connections broken while in standby...the straight forward modification being the same as the one instated by a Ctrl+Q) and leave it up to the sandbox to deal with the situation on the restored node (meaning players who disconnect while on standby are making themselves susceptible to being left in space as per normal rules). However, all this would demand programming that the present system most certainly can't handle and as such takes ressources and time.

Common sense ftw.


I like what you are saying, so basically all the pilots get a message: "We are switching the node, please stand by" they all wait until the connections are all setup and finally they get logged and they can continue beating the **** of each other... sounds good...

RIVERINI / EVENEWS24 @evenews24
Besbin
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
#53 - 2013-01-31 17:05:24 UTC
riverini wrote:
Besbin wrote:
Pohbis wrote:
Quote:
Had we gone this route and moved the system, the Titan and his friends simply wouldn’t have logged back in, killing the fight. So, yea, this just isn’t done.
I might be behind on my supercap warfare lessons, but isn't "logging off" as a supercap under such large firepower leaving you aggressed in space with inactive resist modules, about the last thing a pilot would want to do?

The "we don't do it because people will just not log back in" excuse just doesn't fly CCP. If pilots see it as the best way to escape a fight, they don't have to rely on you doing a real-time node re-inforcement. They can simply, you know, CTRL+Q all by themself Ugh


To be fair...and using a bit of common sense... If they change the node, they change the whole node and there's no such thing as fancy log off mechanisms leaving some people in system and throwing others off. Everybody goes off since there's no damn hardware to keep anyone or anything in. They can save the data state and restore the exact same state once the new node is up, but no changes can be made to this data while the node is down (since, you know, there's no node available to change the data state) and as such nobody can shoot anybody. After the node has been restored, the connections have to be reestablished, and for this they need players to log back in. So I sincerely doubt the scenario you're listing to be relevant.

Just, you know, to be fair :-)

With that said and done, it would of course not be conceptually impossible to switch the player connections to a standby state on another node, restore the data in a modified state (some kind of exception handling for connections broken while in standby...the straight forward modification being the same as the one instated by a Ctrl+Q) and leave it up to the sandbox to deal with the situation on the restored node (meaning players who disconnect while on standby are making themselves susceptible to being left in space as per normal rules). However, all this would demand programming that the present system most certainly can't handle and as such takes ressources and time.

Common sense ftw.


I like what you are saying, so basically all the pilots get a message: "We are switching the node, please stand by" they all wait until the connections are all setup and finally they get logged and they can continue beating the **** of each other... sounds good...


That's what I, from my own technical knowledge, would think is possible. I wrote a question about this to the devs earlier in the thread (of course not expecting an answer, but maybe Veritas lurks somewhere after all ;-). This is mainly a technical issue as I see it, wether you can shift the connection, at runtime, between nodes (not without freezing it of course).

The fringe cases would be people DCing while on standby and people entering the standby'd system. The former would be treated as normal once the node restarts and the later would be put into standby also (potentially glogging up the queue and having 1000 pilots suddenly appear in system once the node restarts...but that's not THAT different from how TiDi is now with the advantages that entails...and everybody's got the same circumstances to react to accordingly).
Adrian Dixon
Arbitrary Spaceship Destruction
-affliction-
#54 - 2013-01-31 17:29:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Adrian Dixon
Are the developers going to add some kind of landmark in the Asakai solor system to commemorate the Battle of Asakai? Perhaps some perminant capital wrecks? Maybe the site could even have a few NPC's and drop salvage loot? I really liked the damaged Jita Statue after the jita event that was a nice touch.
CCP Manifest
CCP Retirement Home
#55 - 2013-01-31 20:16:49 UTC
Dersen Lowery wrote:
Great stuff! One nit:

Quote:
a preplanned RvB (Red Alliance versus Blue Republic) Free-For-All


When did this happen?! (You meant Red Federation.)


My sincere apologies. This has been fixed and thanks for pointing it out.
Totally facepalming since I was even in RvB for a while !

======== o7 _CCP Manifest | Public Relations and Social Media | @ccp_manifest_
NARDAC
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#56 - 2013-02-01 00:26:01 UTC  |  Edited by: NARDAC
Sephira Galamore wrote:

I thought about that, too, while reading the blog.
And I think the most likely scenario to ever do that would be to enable 0% TiDi. That is possible and does exactly what we want -


TiDi is basically multiplying the time something will happen, when you put it into the queue. Normal module cycle time is 60 seconds? So, if the server receives an "activate module" message at 1356976800000 (representing the number of milliseconds since Jan 1, 1970) and would normally add 60,000 (number of milliseconds cycle time) it queues up the module to repeat (or become available to activate again) at 1356976860000.

With TiDi at 10% then instead of adding 60,000 milliseconds to the queue time, it adds 600,000 milliseconds.

If missiles should course correct every 1 second (1000 milliseconds) they course correct every 10 seconds (queued up at 10,000 milliseconds.

Ditto drones. Ditto ship location updates. Ditto everything else.

So, to set TiDi to 0%, every queued up event would have to be set to infinity. or, say max time, which is 2038 for 64 bit machines (Y2K was NOTHING compared to what is coming in 2038).


BUT, the problem has nothing to do with when events will happen.

It has to do with active TCP/IP sessions. When you session change, such as undocking or jumping system to system, your existing tcp/ip session is destroyed and a new one is created. This sometimes takes time, and you can appear in the new system, long before your client has created the new connection to the new server. This is why you are cloaked when you jump and why you are invulnerable when you undock or come out of warp. How much would it suck if instead of jumping to a new location, you appeared in station because the people on the other side of the gate killed you before you even commected to the server and loaded the grid?

I've been in fleets of 200-300, and jumping from one system to another can take 5-10 minutes... this is why the traffic control. That is basically a guess from the server as to how long it will be to get to you, based on how many people are waiting in front of you... like when you call customer service and they say your call will be answered in 2 hours.


When they move a solar system, they just DC every connection, and move the environment. Then people re-establish their connections to the new box one by one as they log in.



So, it seems to me, what they would need to do is stop processing the queue. Copy rather than move the VM. Then one-by-one move ships from one server to the new instance of the solar system, as if they were gate jumping to the new system... say 1 second per x 3000 =oh... an hour.


So, freeze the system, tell everyone the fight will resume in an hour, clone it to the beefy server, no one else can jump into or undock into that system for an hour... then, when everyone is moved add 3,600,000 milliseconds to every event in the queue and... I don't know... give a 1 minute countdown to when the fight is going to start up again?



I'm not sure people will be real happy about the hour of frozen in place time... time for each side to position reinforcements, to jump into the fight as soon as it unfreezes.... just making it every bit as laggy on the new hardware when the fight increases to 6000 ships instead of 3000.
galenwade
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#57 - 2013-02-01 03:29:04 UTC
CCP Manifest wrote:
Dersen Lowery wrote:
Great stuff! One nit:

Quote:
a preplanned RvB (Red Alliance versus Blue Republic) Free-For-All


When did this happen?! (You meant Red Federation.)


My sincere apologies. This has been fixed and thanks for pointing it out.
Totally facepalming since I was even in RvB for a while !



We may have to add you to our ban list for screwing that one up :) .


Please feel free to bribe our leadership in to allowing you in :)
Zan Callira
Sebiestor Tribe
#58 - 2013-02-01 03:36:55 UTC
Just learned of this page.
TL;DR
etc...

Anyway, just wanted to post from a null point of view: OMG you had 3110 players in system as the #1 record battle of the most players in a single combat fight? Really? Really? (there is no "you are stupid" emoticon)

Yes there were many players in that battle, but not record setting. The 3110 player battle in LXQ2-T was actually the SECOND largest fleet battle in eve history. Also it's amusing that the Legendary Chuck Norris of Fleet Battles actually happened upon a system called o2o-2x, and (i'm theorizing this) it's not referred to single combat as it started six hours BEFORE downtime and ended eight hours AFTER downtime (so technically, one giant battle interrupted into 2 battles).

We had 4600+ in local at the peak. Login was 2 hours. Turret activation was 30min. Black Screen Of Death was just under an hour.

You dont believe me?
View from White Noise

Oderint, dum metuant. Let them hate, so long as they fear. -Accius
Zan Callira
Sebiestor Tribe
#59 - 2013-02-01 03:40:09 UTC
Oh and one more thing....

I was there.

In a PvP retriever.

And there was lag.

Oderint, dum metuant. Let them hate, so long as they fear. -Accius
TheSmokingHertog
Julia's Interstellar Trade Emperium
#60 - 2013-02-01 19:08:09 UTC
Galenwade wrote:
CCP Manifest wrote:
Dersen Lowery wrote:
Great stuff! One nit:

Quote:
a preplanned RvB (Red Alliance versus Blue Republic) Free-For-All


When did this happen?! (You meant Red Federation.)


My sincere apologies. This has been fixed and thanks for pointing it out.
Totally facepalming since I was even in RvB for a while !



We may have to add you to our ban list for screwing that one up :) .


Please feel free to bribe our leadership in to allowing you in :)


Thats 2 mouseclicks, it has nothing to do with bribery.

"Dogma is kind of like quantum physics, observing the dogma state will change it." ~ CCP Prism X

"Schrödinger's Missile. I dig it." ~ Makari Aeron

-= "Brain in a Box on Singularity" - April 2015 =-