These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

No Time Dilation | Is it possible? Let's brainstorm

Author
Axure Abbacus
Pentex Subsidiaries Corp
Pentex Subsidiaries Corp Alliance
#21 - 2017-06-20 20:52:06 UTC
I do understand synchronous processing of events really matters. I also see how how the Tranquility infrastructure evolves with the player base. They dedicate a single blade server to a big system fight when they find it. They cherry pick high priority services to better streamline processing. There is the inherent latency of "the speed of light" with all things (darn physics).

What i was getting at is they could free up server blades by off shoring of low priority settings if needed. There are entire regions underutilized that could get crammed onto one blade or off site to a virtual server. Utilizing player resources could be more cost neutral then renting from another company if scaled. There are some Physics events that could be picked out to reduce load.

Maybe they already do this but it could help. They could devote multiple blades by a Russian roll approach. Have one high end dedicated to the on grid, one to the system, another to the constellation, and region. With better resolution, they could split grids to quadrants and run off of multiple server blades for running Grid. Then add predictive algorithm to streamline the cross talk across server blades.

Intels new x9 processor maxes out at 4.5 GHz and puts out over 1 Teraflops and hopefully will make a smoking addition to tranquility.

It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross. But it's not for the timid.

Frostys Virpio
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#22 - 2017-06-20 22:54:28 UTC
Axure Abbacus wrote:


What i was getting at is they could free up server blades by off shoring of low priority settings if needed. There are entire regions underutilized that could get crammed onto one blade or off site to a virtual server. Utilizing player resources could be more cost neutral then renting from another company if scaled. There are some Physics events that could be picked out to reduce load.

Maybe they already do this but it could help. They could devote multiple blades by a Russian roll approach. Have one high end dedicated to the on grid, one to the system, another to the constellation, and region. With better resolution, they could split grids to quadrants and run off of multiple server blades for running Grid. Then add predictive algorithm to streamline the cross talk across server blades.



They already do that for large planned fights and it's not enough. The smallest entity they can assign to a single node is a solar system and even at that point, we cram them so full the server choke on itself and trigger TiDi so the node does not crash. There is no more offloading possible because the whole system has to run on the same processing node. You can't just have one grid on a node then the rest of the system on another one because everything on the node need to be run in sync.
Axure Abbacus
Pentex Subsidiaries Corp
Pentex Subsidiaries Corp Alliance
#23 - 2017-06-20 23:07:12 UTC
Good to know, thanks. Guess they are going to need bigger nodes or develop code to make super nodes.

It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross. But it's not for the timid.

Wander Prian
Nosferatu Security Foundation
#24 - 2017-06-21 12:58:30 UTC
What CCP needs, is s CPU running at 10 GHz speed with good stability. Unfortunately that is not happening any time soon, so get used to TiDi. It's not going anywhere.

Wormholer for life.

Cade Windstalker
#25 - 2017-06-21 13:21:08 UTC
Axure Abbacus wrote:
I do understand synchronous processing of events really matters. I also see how how the Tranquility infrastructure evolves with the player base. They dedicate a single blade server to a big system fight when they find it. They cherry pick high priority services to better streamline processing. There is the inherent latency of "the speed of light" with all things (darn physics).

What i was getting at is they could free up server blades by off shoring of low priority settings if needed. There are entire regions underutilized that could get crammed onto one blade or off site to a virtual server. Utilizing player resources could be more cost neutral then renting from another company if scaled. There are some Physics events that could be picked out to reduce load.

Maybe they already do this but it could help. They could devote multiple blades by a Russian roll approach. Have one high end dedicated to the on grid, one to the system, another to the constellation, and region. With better resolution, they could split grids to quadrants and run off of multiple server blades for running Grid. Then add predictive algorithm to streamline the cross talk across server blades.

Intels new x9 processor maxes out at 4.5 GHz and puts out over 1 Teraflops and hopefully will make a smoking addition to tranquility.


You're really not getting it I think, you could easily compress most of space in Eve onto fewer servers but that wouldn't actually *gain* anything because those freed up servers would just sit not doing anything. The minimum division of Eve right now is one system to one server node, and even within that the limitation is based on things that *have* to be single-threaded, so throwing more resources at a big fleet fight doesn't actually gain you much.

The only major place left for CCP to claw back cycles is by allowing the cluster to divide down to the Grid level, so the big main fight gets its own node and all the smaller fights get to run on other hardware, but even that won't claw back as much as you might think.

In short, you can't run a single grid off of multiple servers. The tasks Eve needs to process do not benefit from that arrangement.
Axure Abbacus
Pentex Subsidiaries Corp
Pentex Subsidiaries Corp Alliance
#26 - 2017-06-21 14:24:12 UTC
Thank you Cade. What i was unaware of was the minimum size that eve can be run on a processing node. Frostys cleared that up for me.

At one point of my life I was a trained network administrator but really found it not fun and stopped being up to date on system architecture. It sounds like server architecture really hasn't evolved as much as I thought it should have since the Solaris and NT 4 days. Sad.

It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross. But it's not for the timid.

Cade Windstalker
#27 - 2017-06-21 16:21:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Cade Windstalker
Axure Abbacus wrote:
Thank you Cade. What i was unaware of was the minimum size that eve can be run on a processing node. Frostys cleared that up for me.

At one point of my life I was a trained network administrator but really found it not fun and stopped being up to date on system architecture. It sounds like server architecture really hasn't evolved as much as I thought it should have since the Solaris and NT 4 days. Sad.


This isn't an architecture problem, it's a coding problem.

Throwing more cores at something only helps if the problem can be broken up between those CPU cores. For the input processing queue and the physics simulation it's hard to impossible to break up the problem into bits that different CPUs can work on. This forces the processing to be done synchronously on a single CPU thread.

No amount of messing with the server or network architecture is going to fix this, nor can the code be changed so that these sorts of bottlenecks don't exist. It's simply how the data has to be processed.
Octavian Nero Gaius
Flaming Fist Rising
Warped Intentions
#28 - 2017-06-21 16:36:11 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Axure Abbacus wrote:
Thank you Cade. What i was unaware of was the minimum size that eve can be run on a processing node. Frostys cleared that up for me.

At one point of my life I was a trained network administrator but really found it not fun and stopped being up to date on system architecture. It sounds like server architecture really hasn't evolved as much as I thought it should have since the Solaris and NT 4 days. Sad.


This isn't an architecture problem, it's a coding problem.

Throwing more cores at something only helps if the problem can be broken up between those CPU cores. For the input processing queue and the physics simulation it's hard to impossible to break up the problem into bits that different CPUs can work on. This forces the processing to be done synchronously on a single CPU thread.

No amount of messing with the server or network architecture is going to fix this, nor can the code be changed so that these sorts of bottlenecks don't exist. It's simply how the data has to be processed.



Thank you and everyone who contributed their thoughts. That is quite unfortunate. I will have to keep an eye on the new game in development called "Dual Universe" which seems to take some of the concepts of EVE and more. It has the single shard universe, and the ability to build structures and perhaps even little cities of your own. It will be interesting to see how they overcome some of the same challenges EVE faces. Perhaps because the code is brand new in 2017 and on, they may be able to achieve this as you stated it's a coding problem.

I'm intrigued to see if "Dual Universe" or another title can do what EVE could not.

Either way, fascinating discussion.
Cade Windstalker
#29 - 2017-06-21 17:39:49 UTC
Octavian Nero Gaius wrote:
Thank you and everyone who contributed their thoughts. That is quite unfortunate. I will have to keep an eye on the new game in development called "Dual Universe" which seems to take some of the concepts of EVE and more. It has the single shard universe, and the ability to build structures and perhaps even little cities of your own. It will be interesting to see how they overcome some of the same challenges EVE faces. Perhaps because the code is brand new in 2017 and on, they may be able to achieve this as you stated it's a coding problem.

I'm intrigued to see if "Dual Universe" or another title can do what EVE could not.

Either way, fascinating discussion.


I'm telling you, flat out, that they can't, the closest they might be able to come is using soft gameplay restrictions to limit the scope of what needs to be processed as one unit to split up the processing that way.

The reason Eve has to have TiDi is because we can have 4000 people all fighting in the same space and potentially affecting each other. For example if person A tells their guns to shoot person B and half a second later person B tells their guns to shoot at C, but A's attack kills person B, then it's very important to person C that those actions get resolved in the order they were sent.

This means that A's game input has to be resolved before B's input. The only way to get around this is to go through all the inputs before hand and determine which ones absolutely won't affect each other. The problem with this approach is that in practice it ends up adding more time and complexity than it actually takes away by allowing the processing to be split, since you end up having to process each command twice.

The other alternative is to simply not care about the order things are processed in, but that creates its own problems and can't be done for physics unless you want some *really* screwed up situations, like two ships sticking together and then flying off together as the game tries to figure out how to deal with two objects that are physically inside each other. Also even if you just discard synchronous processing for inputs you can end up with weird cases where someone gets to act after they should be dead, or someone's action takes longer to resolve because it got stuck behind a complex calculation in the queue on that CPU.

In short it's basically impossible to allow fights on the scale of Eve and not run into this problem, and none of the solutions are great. TiDi is just the one that causes the fewest problems for the actual gameplay. The bad effects that Eve players associate with TiDi would actually be dozens of times worse without TiDi, as anyone who remembers waiting half an hour for grid to load after a fleet jump can attest.
Axure Abbacus
Pentex Subsidiaries Corp
Pentex Subsidiaries Corp Alliance
#30 - 2017-06-22 11:43:13 UTC
Basically eve is using the best commercially available technology to get as close to zero lag is possible. Current hardware and software limitations are what effects big battles. Even Physics says Time dilation happens if you move fast enough unless you bend space time.

Cade, do you in Industry or just really into gaming?

It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross. But it's not for the timid.

Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#31 - 2017-06-22 13:56:48 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
There is no amount of hardware or optimization CCP can put the game through that will ever realistically eliminate TiDi. Even if CCP made it so a 4000 person fight experienced zero TiDi tomorrow within 6 months someone would stuff 5 or 6000 people in a fight and ta-da the TiDi is back.

Sorry but from a purely technical standpoint you are incorrect, there are optical and other processor technologies currently under development that could end TIDI forever. From a practical standpoint you are unfortunately correct there is little that can be done with the current state of hardware that would completely eliminate TIDI.
Cade Windstalker
#32 - 2017-06-22 14:41:27 UTC
Axure Abbacus wrote:
Basically eve is using the best commercially available technology to get as close to zero lag is possible. Current hardware and software limitations are what effects big battles. Even Physics says Time dilation happens if you move fast enough unless you bend space time.

Cade, do you in Industry or just really into gaming?


I program for a living and spent a little time in the games industry, and I know quite a few people there.

I also have an ongoing interest in Eve's tech and development, and in physics processing more generally, so I'm pretty well versed in the basic issues surrounding exactly this kind of processing.

And yes, that's pretty much it. Though the software limitations aren't going anywhere unless some math whiz comes up with a revolutionary partitioning algorithm to make processing large groups of interrelated objects asynchronously *much* faster and more effective.

Donnachadh wrote:
Cade Windstalker wrote:
There is no amount of hardware or optimization CCP can put the game through that will ever realistically eliminate TiDi. Even if CCP made it so a 4000 person fight experienced zero TiDi tomorrow within 6 months someone would stuff 5 or 6000 people in a fight and ta-da the TiDi is back.


Sorry but from a purely technical standpoint you are incorrect, there are optical and other processor technologies currently under development that could end TIDI forever. From a practical standpoint you are unfortunately correct there is little that can be done with the current state of hardware that would completely eliminate TIDI.


Two reasons I disagree with this.

First off, those technologies are currently *far* away from any kind of practical application and I inherently distrust any pop-science article claiming a massive revolution is right around the corner. Doubly so where computing power is concerned. We've been seeing hype around optical processors and other potentially revolutionary ways of getting around Moore's Law for at least the last 15 years. I'll believe the hype when I see one get used outside of a lab.

Second, Eve players are ambitious little b*******s and so are the devs. If CCP announced TQ 4.0 was coming live with 100 times the CPU power in six months, then in a year some nutball will have packed 1-20,000 people onto one grid and TiDi would be a thing again, and six months after that some dev would come up with a new feature or piece of gameplay to use up more of the headroom the new tech bought back, like cutting down the tick rate from 1 second to half a second or something like that.

Heck, know what I'd like to see if we had that kind of CPU power? More positional gameplay. Give players the tools to manage their position within a fleet formation but offload the heavy processing of managing the details to the servers. Even with the one-second tick rate managing the relative positions of a formation of thousands of ships would take a pretty good bite out of any CPU's dead time.
Axure Abbacus
Pentex Subsidiaries Corp
Pentex Subsidiaries Corp Alliance
#33 - 2017-06-22 15:51:47 UTC
Excellent, I look forward to having interesting conversations with you are some point. I bailed out of tech in my early twenties when i had a Sec clearance and learned what being a black hat meant. Now I'm much older and getting back up to speed in computer science and should learn 3d Physics modeling for a side project.

It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross. But it's not for the timid.

Cade Windstalker
#34 - 2017-06-22 16:52:45 UTC
Axure Abbacus wrote:
Excellent, I look forward to having interesting conversations with you are some point. I bailed out of tech in my early twenties when i had a Sec clearance and learned what being a black hat meant. Now I'm much older and getting back up to speed in computer science and should learn 3d Physics modeling for a side project.


Check out Unity, it's great for toying around with games and physics and will let you cut your teeth on some of the basics before you get down into coding your own physics from the ground up.

That'll also give you a good baseline for how things are supposed to behave so you can use that as a frame of reference for why those two cubes just tapped each other and then shot off like bullets... (not that I'm speaking from experience or anything... Oops)
Axure Abbacus
Pentex Subsidiaries Corp
Pentex Subsidiaries Corp Alliance
#35 - 2017-06-22 19:11:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Axure Abbacus
Thanks, that a great help. I was reading up on matlab and wasn't getting it with RL. Hopefully some games will be my speed atm. I'm really left in low gear these days and hit a point where I've started to Thought Experiment somethings that shouldn't be done by mortal minds. I really wished I watched Thermonuclear fusion vs Murphy's law before I got the point of trying to think out a 10^12 particle implosion event. Apparently it melts expensive Silicon.

It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross. But it's not for the timid.

Xzanos
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#36 - 2017-06-30 16:24:14 UTC
Serendipity Lost wrote:
The fix for all this major fight tidi is actually quite simple. When the 'once a year' megafights are in progress - get rid of down time. Just until the fight is over.

Ahem.... I wandered there for a second. Seriously, just turning off the down time when MAJOR fights are I/P (publish a ship minimum ahead of time so DEV/players don't get hooked into shenanigans if a fight goes this way or that way). So there you have it - a little subroutine and some pre-published 'this is when we push the button' guidelines and it will all take care of itself over time. And a fun time it will be!



Wow i really like this idea, I have constantly heard about X value of forces committed but only an extremely small percentage of that will be lost. And it seems fights always fizzle out as a large group of people will not log back into such a cluster **** after DT.

This will also eliminate the stagger of forces returning to the battlefield as people log back in.

*activates thermal hardeners for incoming flame

Frostys Virpio
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#37 - 2017-06-30 17:04:32 UTC
Donnachadh wrote:
Cade Windstalker wrote:
There is no amount of hardware or optimization CCP can put the game through that will ever realistically eliminate TiDi. Even if CCP made it so a 4000 person fight experienced zero TiDi tomorrow within 6 months someone would stuff 5 or 6000 people in a fight and ta-da the TiDi is back.

Sorry but from a purely technical standpoint you are incorrect, there are optical and other processor technologies currently under development that could end TIDI forever. From a practical standpoint you are unfortunately correct there is little that can be done with the current state of hardware that would completely eliminate TIDI.


TiDi will die the day this game is so unpopular big fight can't happen. As long as they can happen, people will throw more bodies into the grinder if they can.
Frostys Virpio
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#38 - 2017-06-30 17:05:35 UTC
Xzanos wrote:
Serendipity Lost wrote:
The fix for all this major fight tidi is actually quite simple. When the 'once a year' megafights are in progress - get rid of down time. Just until the fight is over.

Ahem.... I wandered there for a second. Seriously, just turning off the down time when MAJOR fights are I/P (publish a ship minimum ahead of time so DEV/players don't get hooked into shenanigans if a fight goes this way or that way). So there you have it - a little subroutine and some pre-published 'this is when we push the button' guidelines and it will all take care of itself over time. And a fun time it will be!



Wow i really like this idea, I have constantly heard about X value of forces committed but only an extremely small percentage of that will be lost. And it seems fights always fizzle out as a large group of people will not log back into such a cluster **** after DT.

This will also eliminate the stagger of forces returning to the battlefield as people log back in.


**** would get gamed all the time by logging off before DT if you are losing or bridging more people or even useless alts on grid to trigger a skip on the DT if you are winning.
radkid10
Universal Exos
#39 - 2017-07-02 03:21:56 UTC  |  Edited by: radkid10
the reason why time dilation exists it doesn't matter how powerful the hardware they would have available to them not everybody else has powerful Hardware they slow things down so it's easier for everybody

I need to tell you about my first experience in a massive PVP battle after 5 minutes of seeing 300 people going my way my graphics card was fried

when I run into players that used to play Darkfall I still make this joke Hyperion owes me a graphics card

you cannot have time dilation in a fantasy MMO :(
Octavian Nero Gaius
Flaming Fist Rising
Warped Intentions
#40 - 2017-07-02 15:56:09 UTC
radkid10 wrote:
the reason why time dilation exists it doesn't matter how powerful the hardware they would have available to them not everybody else has powerful Hardware they slow things down so it's easier for everybody

I need to tell you about my first experience in a massive PVP battle after 5 minutes of seeing 300 people going my way my graphics card was fried

when I run into players that used to play Darkfall I still make this joke Hyperion owes me a graphics card

you cannot have time dilation in a fantasy MMO :(



I'd simply like to add, *under current Technology* because you or I have no clue what will be developed tomorrow, next year, or next decade. I will leave it at that.
Previous page123Next page