These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Regarding E-YJ8G last night

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Bob FromMarketing
Space Marketing Department
#121 - 2013-11-25 03:39:56 UTC
Mad Ani wrote:
I was there...

Streamed the whole thing

http://www.twitch.tv/mad_ani/c/3285133


You're still not getting hired.

Doors over there.
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#122 - 2013-11-25 04:55:46 UTC
I've removed some posts discussing moderation. If you have an issue with the way moderation is performed, you are invited to file a petition about the matter. Thank you.

ISD Dorrim Barstorlode

Senior Lead

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department
Toshiro Ozuwara
Perkone
#123 - 2013-11-25 05:08:15 UTC
It's ridiculous that this game claims to be able to support a single shard, and CCP promotes the large battles, which run like crap.

Now, I can understand that there are upper bounds on hardware. But with so much development money being directed in all sorts of other directions, why aren't Eve players getting the best hardware money can buy, ALL OF THE TIME?

Tidi is horrible, no one enjoys playing in it, the problem compounds because it creates huge dogpiles. And we're stuck with it. We get nonsense like ghost sites, silly narratives about the empire against the capsuleers, when what we actually need is better hardware and smarter code for large fleet fights.

This is sort of like the persistent issues with Sov which NEVER GET ADDRESSED.

It didn't take long to locate the tracking beacon, deep inside the quarters for sleepin' They thought they could get away Not today, it's not the way that this kid plays
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#124 - 2013-11-25 05:53:57 UTC
KIller Wabbit wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Quote:
Fact: 9 times out to 10, including this post right now, for the few times that I post the forums have crashed on the first attempt to post. The forums are broken, again.


This is exclusively a browser issue.

It happens to me one or two times out of every fifty or so posts, and has been for the last 2 years.


My bad - forgot to include, 9 of 10 since the recent forum updates over the past two weeks. Before then I had about the same failure rate, one out of 50. Not rarely, but certainly much more reasonable.


Yes, and I had much the same problem once the update came out. For about twenty minutes, until I re-downloaded Firefox.

And now I'm back to my usual experience.

You may also wish to check what plugins you have active, regardless of which browser you are using.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#125 - 2013-11-25 07:43:55 UTC
Tidi is like chemo.
It's hard to tell if it's worse than the problem it's trying to alleviate.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#126 - 2013-11-25 07:57:53 UTC
Q, Lors Dornick: You are aware that people can use out game communication to organise themselves?
A: Even if they have no FC, they still are being logged off from the game. Also, ships without a FC are prioritized in the logoff precisely to avoid skipping the FC penalties. As an additional twist, high value ships could be prioritized too.

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#127 - 2013-11-25 07:59:49 UTC
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
Q, Lors Dornick: You are aware that people can use out game communication to organise themselves?
A: Even if they have no FC, they still are being logged off from the game. Also, ships without a FC are prioritized in the logoff precisely to avoid skipping the FC penalties. As an additional twist, high value ships could be prioritized too.


Q. Are you aware how insanely idiotic a game mechanic that intentionally disconnects people from the game would actually be?

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#128 - 2013-11-25 08:07:04 UTC  |  Edited by: James Amril-Kesh
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
Q, Lors Dornick: You are aware that people can use out game communication to organise themselves?
A: Even if they have no FC, they still are being logged off from the game. Also, ships without a FC are prioritized in the logoff precisely to avoid skipping the FC penalties. As an additional twist, high value ships could be prioritized too.


Q. Are you aware how insanely idiotic a game mechanic that intentionally disconnects people from the game would actually be?

These kinds of ideas aren't even worth acknowledging.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#129 - 2013-11-25 10:54:41 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
These kinds of ideas aren't even worth acknowledging.


Niip 'em in the bud before you are tempted to call the poster nasty names. That will never well Lol

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#130 - 2013-11-25 10:59:20 UTC
Alphea Abbra wrote:
CCP Explorer wrote:
Section 1.5 here http://community.eveonline.com/support/policies/eve-reimbursement-policy covers fleet fights.
Doesn't 1.3 pretty much say that reimbursement can happen?
Since it was due to a server error, and not the actual combat?


And then points 4 and 5 specifically state that reimbursement will never happen when a ship in a large player engagement was lost due to lag.

It helps to be less selective about your reading of the rules Lol

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Seven Koskanaiken
Shadow Legions.
SONS of BANE
#131 - 2013-11-25 12:35:00 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
"Let's force less people to participate, that'll make things more fun"


Capping the system is the unequal sharing of blessings, tidi is the equal sharing of misery.
Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#132 - 2013-11-25 13:04:12 UTC
The simplest, best, and only solution is to adjust the mechanics and incentives that make blobbing not just the winning strategy, but the only strategy.

/thread

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal
Tialano Utrigas
Running with Dogs
Out of the Blue.
#133 - 2013-11-25 13:15:49 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
Alphea Abbra wrote:
CCP Explorer wrote:
Section 1.5 here http://community.eveonline.com/support/policies/eve-reimbursement-policy covers fleet fights.
Doesn't 1.3 pretty much say that reimbursement can happen?
Since it was due to a server error, and not the actual combat?


And then points 4 and 5 specifically state that reimbursement will never happen when a ship in a large player engagement was lost due to lag.

It helps to be less selective about your reading of the rules Lol


Its also worth pointing out that a server disconnect isn't lag, and it does that that disconnects on the server side would warrant reimbursement.

The guys who lost their ships as a result of the DC have a credible case for petition. The billions of ISK of fighters may be a different ball game, although in fairness, they were also lost due to an in game error so its really anyones guess (well CCPs actually) as to what will happen.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#134 - 2013-11-25 13:26:23 UTC
MeBiatch wrote:
Ting Mei wrote:
Veritas,

The problem is not only the node crash, but the TiDi system.

Even if we are all ok that is better to have TiDi than a systematic node crash as before, TiDi is really ruining the game little by little.

When you are in a fight, TIDI 10% is often activated, but the problem, is our brain not at 10%, and TIDI offer all the time for reinforcement to come, strategies to be discussed, etc ....

This really change the way of a fight ...

I'm very afraid CCP think TiDi is THE solution, and you are not working on something else ...

For me, don't know for others, even if on internal coms, most of players hate Tidi, that system is Ruining 0.0 fights little by little.


the only way to counter Tidi is to make deminishing returns for too much players or dps or something that makes it not worth it to bring 1000's of people to a fight... thats the problem is the blob...

i remember back in 06 when 200 people in a fight would cause black screens and node crashes now its 4000 people. the fact is they make it so you can play 4000 you guys will bring 5000 and so on... it really never ends...

there needs to be a mechanic for demishing returns.


No, that changes NOTHING.

Even if you make diminishign returns is stillb etter more peopel than less!

The result is EXACLTY the same.


The way is chaging the war TARGETS. We nee dmore targets that are relevant in a war that can be knocked down by 20-30 ships before a massive blob can form up.

As long as eve is centered about billion EHP targets, the massive blob will be the only way.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#135 - 2013-11-25 13:49:22 UTC
Q, SurrenderMonkey: Are you aware how insanely idiotic a game mechanic that intentionally disconnects people from the game would actually be?
A: It is less stupid than risk to a node crash that averts the battle, and is less stupid than suffer 10% TiDi for 6 hours, and is less idiotic than spend time and resources to increase the population limit of a node so the alliances can move the goalpost farther again. And, on top of that, it would work. Keep calm and love the hamsters, and everything will be OK.

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you
Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#136 - 2013-11-25 13:51:14 UTC
No, it's more stupid.

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#137 - 2013-11-25 15:11:18 UTC
Tialano Utrigas wrote:
The guys who lost their ships as a result of the DC have a credible case for petition.

No, they don't.
The reimbursement policy is very clear on this.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#138 - 2013-11-25 15:29:39 UTC
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
Q, SurrenderMonkey: Are you aware how insanely idiotic a game mechanic that intentionally disconnects people from the game would actually be?
A: It is less stupid than risk to a node crash that averts the battle, and is less stupid than suffer 10% TiDi for 6 hours, and is less idiotic than spend time and resources to increase the population limit of a node so the alliances can move the goalpost farther again. And, on top of that, it would work. Keep calm and love the hamsters, and everything will be OK.



That was a really round-a-bout way of saying "No".

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
embrel
BamBam Inc.
#139 - 2013-11-25 18:23:26 UTC  |  Edited by: embrel
Kagura Nikon wrote:

The way is chaging the war TARGETS. We nee dmore targets that are relevant in a war that can be knocked down by 20-30 ships before a massive blob can form up.

As long as eve is centered about billion EHP targets, the massive blob will be the only way.


That could be simple I assume, just split the EHP when a structure comes out of reinforcement to 4-5 new structures that spawn nearest to the actual target system.

However, I feel that is not wanted. Huge fights are PR after all.

Or there just will be 5 huge blobs:)

Or they just meet in one place resulting in the same as today.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#140 - 2013-11-25 18:51:31 UTC
The obvious answer here is that sov as a whole needs to be entirely revamped.
CCP of course seems to be under the impression that it's working fine.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)