Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Today I had the most appalling experience I've ever had in a video game, in the four jumps between Sarum Prime and Bagodan. TiDi is a valid idea but I interpret it as a direct representation of how un-playable the game is (and fail), and there's gotta be a better way.

Having expressed my frustration, I have some suggestions regarding the need for a central server with sole responsibility for calculations and TiDi.

Now that internet bandwidth has progressed as much as it has since 2003 and ISDN, and computers are faster, I think the game and its clients can handle, and will benefit from, a decentralized, torrent-like model. Each system with its own client-to-client torrent (operating at faster than 1Hz), all events calculated by the receiving client, and status updates sent to the server at the historical 1Hz .

Each system as a decentralized, client-to-client "shard", and the server as a tracker of all systems. Like torrents, systems become more robust with additional clients, rather than slower.

"I'll just leave this here."

because THAT isnt vulnerable to exploits and hacking at all . . .

Torrents aren't faster, just cheaper.

The client is never secure from tampering. The best developers can do is not put anything worth tampering with in the client.

How exactly do you think the client can be secured ?


You'll need to be very specific. Certainly a lot more specific than saying CCP should use torrents (good for data transfer) for data processing. Try something that actually makes sense.

I meant client-to-client in terms of calculations, not just for data transfer. because the issue is server cpu load, not bandwidth. rather than asking permission from the server and waiting to be told what has happend to their ship, have the client make the calculation and update the server. client-server communication would be more one-way than the current send-receive... the server would act as a record keeper, less as a number-cruncher.

spread the burden of damage/boosts/watchlist to the client receiving the effects. between each 1Hz update, a number of things will happen to a client.

two ships are PVPing. one ship has the other pointed. the aggressor client is telling the receiving client:

"I'm applying -2 warp strength and shot you with medium rails II. my damage modifier, change in xyz, and tracking is ___"
"I'm applying -2 warp strength and shot you with medium rails II. my damage modifier, change in xyz, and tracking is ___"
"I'm applying -2 warp strength and shot you with medium rails II. my damage modifier, change in xyz, and tracking is ___"

the updates to the server from the receiving client would look like,

"xxxx shot me with xxxx and did 99.8 damage
xxxx shot me with xxxx and did 99.8 damage
xxxx shot me with xxxx and did 99.8 damage
I died"

the ship was trying to warp, but it was pointed. upon each warp command it calculated:

"I have -2 warp points applied to me against my +1 warp strength, so I will drop the command and display that I cannot warp."
"I have -2 warp points applied to me against my +1 warp strength, so I will drop the command and display that I cannot warp."
"I have -2 warp points applied to me against my +1 warp strength, so I will drop the command and display that I cannot warp."

meanwhile, client-to-client the same ship is telling everyone who has it locked and or in fleet:

"I received 99.8 damage, i now have 68% shields
I received 99.8 damage, i now have 55% shields
I received 99.8 damage, i now have 30% shields
I'm dead"

everyone in fleet receives that notification and calculates:

"xxxx now has 68% shields but they are not on watch list so I will drop that info"
or
"xxxx now has 68% shields and they are on watch list but I do not see them on grid so I will not display their health bars"
or
"xxxx now has 68% shields and they are on watch list and I see them on grid, so I will update their health bars"

while a fleet booster is in system and while its links are running it's telling everyone in a valid fleet:

"I'm giving you a 20% siege resist boost
I'm giving you a 20% siege resist boost
I'm giving you a 20% siege resist boost"

ships liable to receive those boosts calculate:

"I'm receiving a 20% siege resist boost but I am not in a valid fleet so I will not apply the boost"
or
"I'm receiving a 20% siege resist boost and I am in a valid fleet but I don't see you on grid so I will not apply the boost"
or
"I'm receiving a 20% siege resist boost and I am in a valid fleet and I see them on grid so I will apply the boost"

and the server does not have to handle all of these calculations.

---

and that's the best i've got

Do you know what will happen in reality? I think it'll be on par with:


If you move all calculations to client-side all it takes is to modify incoming/outgoing packets to suit your needs. Any encryption you put will be reverse engineered and bypassed eventually.

It doesnt change the fact that it is possible. It WILL be abused (maybe not to the extent i described above).
One of rules of (proper) game design is: do all calculations server-side, anything and everything you put into client is a weapon in hands of players.

Yeah, I did although your response tells me you misunderstood. I'm not talking about hashing the executable, I'm talking about a hash of the data received. So a torrent, when I say "send me lock 6", you send me that and my client goes "right, so when I hash this data it should be 12345" and then if it isn't it tells you you're block 6 was incorrect and asks someone else for it. This is easy for a torrent, since when the torrent is made, the data is fixed.

With the server situation the data is not fixed. Every target ID, damage amount, ship type, etc would result in a different set of data, and thus a different hash. There's no way for the server to know that you sent it actual correct data, without working it out itself and comparing what you sent to what it worked out itself. Think of it like a math teacher checking your results of a complex sum without seeing your workings. It's fine if that teacher does the math themselves or already has the answer written down, but they can't glance at it and say "yup, that's right". The server would be the same. It would either have to work it out itself, or take it for granted that you aren't lying.

Security questions aside, you're trying to solve the easiest problem.

The engine does four things:

1) hit the database for every character each time they undergo a session change.

2) run all the individual calculations;

3) assemble the calculation into a series of actions and consequences;

4) push information about the actions and consequences to all relevant parties.

#1, #3, and #4 are the pain points. CCP Veritas and his team have been hard at work breaking #1 and #4 out so that they can be called asynchronously (and in the case of #1, the results stored in a lightweight "brain in a box"), which means that they can run in separate threads. Breaking #3 into parallelizable chunks is a hard problem, because its job is to assemble all the disparate chunks--that is, actions by individual characters--into a single, consistent set of consequences.

You're solving #2.