Jita Park Speakers Corner

All the changes brought by all releases, from TIDI birth till now, are irrelevant.

The most important things to fix are lag and TIDI (no1 enemy of an ejoyable EVE Online).
Last night I took part ( for the first time in my EVE history and life ) in a sov null fight in U-QVWD,
with merely 600 pilots when I was there.

This is what all new pilots wants and dream of, to be part of big events and fights that shape EVE history.
But the reality was cruel, not because I lost my ship without even activating a single module,
not because my alliance lost a battle or whatever.
It was a cruel reality because lag spread its venom everywhere, and then in the staging system,
TIDI showed itself to me like a merciless GOD.

TIDI destroyed my imaginary big juicy heroic fights with capital ships and all that sheep.
It really was not important for me to loose or to win the fight, nor my ship or my pod, because I prepared myself for that.
What I was not prepared for was TIDI and the experience of a broken game that had nothing to do with the EVE that I knew till then. It was critically important to enjoy a game that can offer big fleet fights in a normal client/server behavior, like small gang fights or 1v1 duels.

I was very disappointed , suddenly when TIDI hit the game it was not anymore the grandiose EVE Online MMO
best game of the 20XX , but it was a broken game, a FMMO= Failed Massively Multiplayer Offline game.

I thought ; How can the other guys like this sheep ? How can anyone like a game that is broke in one of its most advertized features, in that of Massively Multiplaying (big fleet fights) ?

I think the most important thing that CCP should do, is to fix up EVE Online as a real MMO, so that the players can enjoy 1k or 2k or 3k or xk pilots in local system fights as they do in 1v1 without TIDI & CO.
Everything else is not important anymore for me.

I learned a very bitter lesson and reality ; I can not play EVE Online in its funniest manifestation = BIG FLEET FIGHTS or in Alliance Warfare or in Sovereignty Warfare, and that is 50% or more of EVE Online game experience.

TIDI is not the cure, TIDI is the disease, and with TIDI ,
EVE is not anymore a MMO game but a SMO small multiplayer online game.

There are changes happening which should help.

Go look for details on Dogma, and Brain in a Box.


(oh, and CCP's doing better than most. more MMO realms do 2-3k total. not all interacting at the one time.)

there's big changes to do with how the eve servers communicate with each other and the client

the goal is to reduce the amount of data they have to keep sharing. the target data for brain-in-a-box project is character information, which apparently gets sent around more than it needs to and contributes to lag a lot. it's not latency though it just makes really big queues of data for the servers to crunch through?

dogma is the name of some eve server data handling thingo

also. fights with tidi are far better than 'fights' before tidi

Right now, session changes are expensive, time wise.

Watch a fleet taking multiple jumps, and you'll find it causing systems to go into TiDi.

BiaB takes the work that happens at session change, and caches it (basically. It's more complex than that, but it's a good approximation)

The dogma rewrite is something which is required to make that work.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diGYlJNpPEo may be of interest.

Ongoing, unfortunately.

It's a pretty major rewrite, and because it touches so many things, they have to keep integrating other changes into it.

there is a thread in GD about the Biab rewrite, it has a lot of information from one of the devs working on it. I can say i do not envy his job.

I've only ever seen if referred to as an interim solution - in which dev post did you see it called any different? From what I've heard of the pre-time dilation period, it was a roll of the dice as to whether you got into the fight or just got a black screen until you woke up in the clone bay. Having fought in time dilation on a fair few occasions, it's way better than that, though obviously not ideal.

Edit: Limiting players like you suggest would be pretty dumb. Attacker manages to get 250 - 300 guys into your system and all you can do at that point is watch everything burn. I believe people used to do this before we had time dilation, though I'm sure someone who was there will correct me if I'm wrong.

Dumb is your viewpoint admiral root.

Who said that the limit number in system would follow the actual rule First Arrived (jump request) First Served ?

If the number that a system can handle is 400 then it can be limited the number allowed for the defense and attack fleets.

For example the alliance holding the sov of the system can be allowed to login 200 pilots to defend the system, and the attack force can be limited to login 200 pilots. How can be done this? With if-else statements ;).

1.Are you an alliance pilot holding the sov of the system X ?

-> if yes then go to 2

-> if no then go to 3

2.Is the number of alliance (sov holder) pilots in system < 200 ?

-> if yes then welcome to the party; you may jump to system X

-> if no then sorry all seats are taken; you may not jump to X system

3. Is the number of non alliance (sov holder) pilots in system < 200 ?

-> if yes then welcome to the party; you may jump to X system

-> if no then sorry all seats are taken; you may not jump to system X

Similar rules can be applied to logged off pilots in system X

This will require to limit the fleet numbers too.


The limitation with equal number of pilots allowed for defense/attack can be done and well managed.

Then the fight will not depend on how many ships you can bring, but what ships and who you will bring (skills and fc), or how well you manage attack / defense .

There will be room for all the pilots of the alliance to join the fight, but not in one system but in several systems, so an alliance can organize a constellation invading/defense operation or in a whole region at once. Each fight will be enjoyed (without TiDi) and depend only on the skills and decisions (ship fit selection) of the pilots participating in each fight.

There are a thousand ways to achieve a goal, IF YOU WANT TO, but dumb pilots can't see this.

It's not a new idea. Which is why people immediately discount it, as they've already pointed out all the problems which can occur. No-one's had a way of doing it which isn't hideously open to being gamed.

No, I didn't realise your "idea" was intentionally and ridiculously biased in favour of the defender.