These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Pohbis
Neo T.E.C.H.
#61 - 2013-02-03 07:25:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Pohbis
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...
Yeah. let's try that.

Fight on a normal node:

Team A fights team B.

Team A thinks they can't save their tackled Titan, and decide to roll the dice by CTRL+Qing. Their Titan stays in space while the timer runs down. Team B either kill it in time, or they don't.

Fight on a node that gets re-inforced:

Team A fights team B.

Team A thinks they can't save their tackled Titan so when the node kicks everyone off to transfer them to a re-inforced node, they don't log back in. Node comes back up and Team A's Titan stays in space while the timer runs down. Team B either kill it in time, or they don't.

Nothing changes in that regard. Yes, they'd probably have to emergency-warp people off and on the field, and yes, anything not bubbled you'll probably lose point on - but the aggression timers stay. Nobody is getting an advantage that they couldn't simply have achieved by closing the client in a normal fight.

Thus, CCP saying they wont re-inforce a node while a fight is going on, because people tackled will just not log back in, is pure spin. They can decide to roll the "log out an aggressed super"-dice anytime they want. They don't have to wait and pray for CCP to take the node offline for that.

Yes, there could be some edge cases, like someone logging back in faster than others, but in a fight of this scale in 10% TiDi, you are at the mercy of the node anyway. I'm pretty confident that 99.9% of the time, both sides would be more than happy to re-log their fleets, in order to get a 10% TiDi fight moved over to a re-inforced node.

There could be a myriad of worries that CCP has about re-inforcing a node with an on-going fight. But when 2 sides pile 2000+ pilots into a system, one of them shouldn't be if one side decides they don't want to log back in. On this scale, if you want to disengage, there are other options for that. For smaller fights, re-enforcing isn't an issue.

So next time, more talking about what happens in a fight of this scale, less pointing out the obvious about how a client can't send commands to an offline node Blink
Besbin
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
#62 - 2013-02-04 15:41:52 UTC
Pohbis wrote:

Thus, CCP saying they wont re-inforce a node while a fight is going on, because people tackled will just not log back in, is pure spin.

So next time, more talking about what happens in a fight of this scale, less pointing out the obvious about how a client can't send commands to an offline node Blink


Well, you do seem to still not understand how things are more and less costly in ressources. I do not view it as "pure spin", when I see the problem as being more ressource costly than you do (as it would seem). We COULD call it "lazy programmers", but even then it is at the very least a matter of prioritization (e.g. would you rather have POSes or hot swap nodes?).

We're on the same side here buddy. No need to doubt that. And I do hope that CCP reads this and at the very least takes their time to consider the design requirements. I don't think it's just an easy thing to do, but I would also hate for it to just be disregarded due to "lazyness" (or "spin" as you term it).

/Besbin
Daniel Moonway
Almost Replaced
#63 - 2013-02-04 16:25:56 UTC
I say put a monument there
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#64 - 2013-02-04 16:37:32 UTC
"We move the fight system onto a “supernode”. We’ve got a couple machines that are crazy-good hardware, well above what the rank and file of the cluster is. This is the machine that systems get reinforced on when players request that for a preplanned fight of this magnitude. Unfortunately, the same thing above applies – anyone in the system when the move happens gets disconnected. Because of this, it’s basically never done for a battle already in session. In this case, the fight broke out because of a Titan put out of position by accident. 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."

CCP, once you restart the new node all ships will e-warp back to their starting position. Any ship with aggression on it has a 15 minute timer. It stays in space until that timer expires. If it gets shot in that 15 minutes the timer is renewed. So if the Titan pilot and his friends did not re-log, their ships would sit in space being big pinatas, until destroyed.

However, I can still see it being a bad idea to move the fight. Everyone cannot relog at once. If the Titan pilot got held up in the log in queue he would never get a chance to defend his ship before it was lost. You would have to do something like disconnect everyone, move the solar system, then then set TiDi to zero speed until most everyone has had a chance to get through the log in queue, then start up the system.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction

Nyla Skin
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#65 - 2013-02-05 09:11:26 UTC
There used to be time when I thought events like this were epic and exciting. Nowadays they don't feel special at all.

In after the lock :P   - CCP Falcon www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies