tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post8415143435381108506..comments2024-02-27T14:44:07.868+01:00Comments on Greedy goblin: How to make 4000+ fights smooth without supercomputersGevlonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07072766785893313616noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-9711920367975317432013-08-05T23:21:04.572+02:002013-08-05T23:21:04.572+02:00I find it interesting that many of your solutions ...I find it interesting that many of your solutions call for the elimination of the individual. The kicking of the 'unimportant' parties. The 'useless' small ships. The removal of individual independence.<br /><br />Those are the things that people appreciate the most. There is a lot of scorn to 'anchor press F1' because it is such a simple activity. It is still an activity that you have to focus groups of people on.<br /><br />This solution turns Eve into a game where people play, devote their time, energy, and accounts to being someone's toy. While, in the big scheme of looking at what people are doing for a common goal may have a similar exterior appearance, to walk up to them and say, "I am removing your individuality and gluing you into a massive machine run by your FC go watch television" does not seem to be an answer.<br /><br />It is almost AFK PvP warfare on the scale of AFK mining.Sugar Kylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15437978687639772023noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-17160276717532580832013-08-05T22:28:55.869+02:002013-08-05T22:28:55.869+02:00Ah, I misunderstood. So N would be a function of ...Ah, I misunderstood. So N would be a function of server load, not just automatically grouping all the same ships together. You'd still have literally hundreds of groups on grid with you.<br /><br />I think this is actually not a bad idea. I'll have to give it some more thought.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09714761772780283634noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-34390098345700165892013-08-05T21:14:06.959+02:002013-08-05T21:14:06.959+02:00If there are 2000 people in the enemy and they are...If there are 2000 people in the enemy and they are condensed into 500 groups, you can still call targets and switch.Gevlonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07072766785893313616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-14111464519763716292013-08-05T17:29:01.548+02:002013-08-05T17:29:01.548+02:00Wait a minute, the eve server software is really s...<i>Wait a minute, the eve server software is really single threaded?! You're telling me that a game with up to 4000+ fights that in addition existed for over 10 years now does not have any multi threading capabilities?</i> <br /><br />Until TiDi, fights would hit the server limit at a much lower limit. Fights with 400 players would result in a node crash. Having more than 1000 pilots blowing each other up is a very recent thing. <br /><br />My company sells software, and our server product is finally starting to get rewritten to be multi-threaded and distributed. The managers don't like "spending" the resources to do so because they don't value what the improvements bring - nor do they understand it. <br /><br /><i>And skill bonuses are recalculated every single time ....</i><br /><br />Yes, every time you board/leave a ship or dock. One simple scheme to handle this might be to use a second processor to calculate the stats instead of forcing the main thread to do so. If they can't handle asynchronous message passing (asynch & distributed coding has some interesting hard-to-find bugs and a lot of odd edge cases, with interesting names like "dining philosophers" and "byzantine generals"), then a simple solution would be to stash it in a table, a "scoreboard" for the system.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-56878536948231833222013-08-05T16:11:47.829+02:002013-08-05T16:11:47.829+02:00So if the group is targeted, it's always the c...So if the group is targeted, it's always the controller's ship that matters? Doesn't that mean that there will just always be full logi on that ship? Doesn't this completely eliminate target calling, target switching, etc?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09714761772780283634noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-36135168088974583332013-08-05T15:05:33.251+02:002013-08-05T15:05:33.251+02:00> Wait a minute, the eve server software is rea...> Wait a minute, the eve server software is really single threaded?! You're telling me that a game with up to 4000+ fights that in addition existed for over 10 years now does not have any multi threading capabilities?<br /><br />Keep in mind, 10 years ago, it just wasn't efficient to do multithreading.<br /><br />the single thread nature of Eve is essentially the result of the game running for 10 years straight without interruption ...<br /><br /><br />Anyhow, yes, the solution is scalable multithreading. There's no limit to the amount of available cores, so eventually, we can imagine 50k+ players in one battle at realtime speeds. It'd be a complete clusterfuck, but possible.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-81677063890876025182013-08-05T15:01:57.102+02:002013-08-05T15:01:57.102+02:00I think this solution would not be liked by most p...I think this solution would not be liked by most players. In general when you're playing an interactive game any kind of loss of control is received very badly.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-31244025856298329812013-08-05T13:57:33.493+02:002013-08-05T13:57:33.493+02:00this only applies if your suggestion wont eat up t...this only applies if your suggestion wont eat up the same resources like the N ships flown individually. such functionality you suggest has other negative side effects like syncing and deciding per beat. we can't have nice things like this .. without involving the server to check on anything the clients want to do.<br />Also people tend to dislike random decision making.<br /><br />TiDi. makes large fleet fights possible but with a price. TiDi favours the bigger "group" with fastest logistics and bigger ISK .. outside of the TiDi bubble .. to reinforce the battle.<br /><br />sure CCP has to refactor the bottlenecks. they do and try.<br />and end up like their devops thread http://devopsreactions.tumblr.com/post/57413902179/lead-meets-devs-after-refactoring<br />So TiDi is the solution until then.<br />Other games do hardlimits and restrict on multiple ways. gw2 max siege equip and max players. Aion server just crashed on siege with 600+ players. Wow dunno what they do, their biggest BG is instanced .. do/did they had ever big openpvp battles?. Hard limit and instancing is a solution .... with a big price-tag, like not be bubble to reinforce the battle from outside to the inside.<br /><br />What ever CCP does they have to do something about it ... and it will limit gameplay ... and hatters will hate. With only 50k~ online players .. to handle 9-10% of them in one system is a big thing and the dev team really did something great. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-68262188552255459232013-08-05T11:57:43.195+02:002013-08-05T11:57:43.195+02:00Wait a minute, the eve server software is really s...Wait a minute, the eve server software is really single threaded?! You're telling me that a game with up to 4000+ fights that in addition existed for over 10 years now does not have any multi threading capabilities?<br /><br />And skill bonuses are recalculated every single time ....<br /><br />We don't need any new game mechanics or expensive hardware, we need CCP to recode their software (and not even that much as a lot of code just deals with stuff that doesn't occur in battles anyway).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-81503885618176868102013-08-05T11:16:54.937+02:002013-08-05T11:16:54.937+02:00This suggestion seems as hard to implement as dyna...This suggestion seems as hard to implement as dynamic node ballancing. This ide is as well horrenduously obscure. And more obscurity is never good in game design and code.<br /><br />CCP can evidently make server nodes which can handele 2K+ players without any problem. So if they would be able to dynamicaly rebalance server nodes whe players on one node peaks everything would be really smooth transparent and happy.<br /><br />Solution might be even some semi-dyanmic reballancing like: "ohh 4000 players in system lets restart a node a little bit and let their client frozen and logged in before trafic reroutes to new node..."<br /><br />From outside todays reballancing seems like: "ohh 4000 ppl in system lets just tidi 10% and really lag for many tens of minutes then just crash maybe or crash only a little bit for some players."<br /><br />But anyways CCP seems to be working on multithread solution so it might in some time bring us infinite performance.Oska Rusnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-32289356881399646262013-08-05T09:28:16.356+02:002013-08-05T09:28:16.356+02:00The AFK and socket closed averages out. While it&#...The AFK and socket closed averages out. While it's true that the actual group leader AFK means whole group AFK, but if the non-leader goes AFK, his ship keeps shooting. Same for spy: until he is group lead he cannot stop shooting.<br /><br />Also, self destruct turning off hardeners, kills only himself, as upon death he gets into pod and the group lives on with one less member and new leader.<br /><br />Warping off indeed works, but members can quit the group and in 50% TiDi a battleship warps in 20-25 seconds even if not bubbled.Gevlonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07072766785893313616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-48043142703216514332013-08-05T09:10:15.509+02:002013-08-05T09:10:15.509+02:00If that one player gets a "socket closed"...If that one player gets a "socket closed", the whole group will get a "socket closed". If that one player is "emergency afk", the whole group will be sitting ducks. If that one player is a spy, the whole group will suddenly warp away or activate self destruction. <br />I for myself wouldn't want to be "the choosen one", the one who gets a "gf" after he succeeded or endless flame if he failed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-88481496579316298162013-08-05T07:31:55.749+02:002013-08-05T07:31:55.749+02:00A super computer wouldn't even solve the probl...A super computer wouldn't even solve the problem, the server process would need to be multi threaded to work on a super computer. It isn't. The fact is CCP decided not to code for Multi-Core cpu's way back when. They need to bite the bullet and code for multi-cpu environment, then you can dynamically assign more cpu/gpu units to a give node for smooth performance.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com