CCP when the chat system is fixed, can you somehow make sure Jita chat stays broken, kthxbye 
8 Likes
You wonât ⌠they are unable to fix things that are borrowed deeply within the system. What you will miss is EVE since EVE is dying as its software-lifecycle nears its end.
Why not get rid of local at this point? It encourages awareness, is a good counter against bots and is generally a real QoL improvement for PVP.
1 Like
You meant calm and strong voice, clearly distinguishable from all the panic squeeking from Nullsec monkeys. âBut I joined this megablob to be safe in 0 securityâ. Hahaha.
2 Likes
If my mining and PVE ship could be PVP fitted in eve that would not be a problem. Otherwise it is not a QoL improvement, as doing any PVE stuff would put the person in seriously worse situation against PVP fitted ship. Dscan doesnt help against cloaked ships, so it would not always be about awareness. If your QoL would happen, you could not afford to do PVP anymore because of how much any fit would cost you.
Yes all the windows went blank. Chat just dued all at once.
1 Like
Next step is to outsource the overview - it lags the game during big engagements for sure, especially when things start moving and shooting. 
I got drunk last night and thought about thisâŚnow they would never do this (right?) But if they did eve would literally DIE.
SHOOT. Outsourcing chat was a mistake to begin with. I mean why the hell would you do that? It was fine before. Why?
1 Like
That news sounds a bit negative compared to the work which have been made lastly in order to kick all the vanilla stuff and Iâm unsure about the direction itâs going.
I canât disagree about the facts for certain :
=> itâs currently less stable that the previously homemade system
But, if i remember well about the past discussions, you switched to a jabber technology (or something quite similar) - which is widely used by other structure in EVE (Imperium is one of them, but itâs also used by a lot of alliance) OR even outside EVE - without any issues. I agree that Imperium is not handling 31 000 users, but well, itâs actually the largest active community in EVE (saying In-Game in term of members) and we donât have troubles.
So, wouldnât be better for both side to continue using that new system instead roll-backing a part of it which can even lead to more instability according to last applied changes to the core ? Maybe step aside a bit on all the skins, hulls and other non prior stuff and focus a bit more on that chat issue ?
Donât be mad, itâs working most of the time. So there is definitely some specific case(s) which is causing troubles.
I mean, lastly, you wanted to kick all the POS system - and weâve reached parity with structures. So youâll make the same ending in case youâre discovering an issue related to - either balancing or corporation permissions ? (yeah, because there will also have issues with them at some point - itâs part of the game of kicking vanilla un-understandable working stuff).
Finally, everyone in EVE which have a bit of history know that the hosting system itself is complex - based on nodes - and quite in advance compared to the super cloud and other Docker stuff - in its time. We have no clue about how this new chat system is designed though. And I personally donât think itâs designed the same way as system nodes - itâs even not hosted in the same place.
So, is the problem really related to the new chat system ? Or maybe much more related to the way it has been deployed ?
And, just for the joke, peoples who use to live in WH never need a working local - so why other are so much in need of this ? 
I think the problem has nothing to do with outsourcing or outsourcing probably never happened. Itâs likely ccp has brought a proven xmpp solution. But there is a problem, local chat in eve is so different from normal xmpp server usage since the user need to join and leave the group in timely manner regularly and also keep sync with the game server. This could easily overload the xmpp server or triger bugs not happen in common usage.
Guys, if you cannot even implement a working chat system then this is a new low for me. I mean it is not trivial to have that amount of data being processed efficiently, but then it has been done and will be done again by so many others successfully, that if you cannot do it, then you should really start a discussion about what the hell is wrong with your company.
2 Likes
Doesnt justify CCP doing almost nothing about this issue for 10 months.
The problem is not that they didnât try, the problem is that they didnât succeed.
1 Like
Interesting line of thought, as you clearly show the intersection between what we call PVP and PVE and how they are inseparable, in both directions. As far as I know, there are already mining ships that can be and should be PVP fitted. Procurer, Skiff and Porpoise can take on other ships of their size, not to mention the Rorqual. Then there are other mining ships such as the Hulk or Covetor who are paper thin and canât really do much of anything in a fight.
However, the fact that PVE and PVP are so deeply linked to each other that PVE is, for all practical purposes, a form of PVP, bears the question how to understand the difference between a Hulk and a Skiff. It seems that the choice here is one similar to the âtank or gankâ question. Do you fit for maximum damage to give you a higher chance to destroy an opponents value, or, is it more important for you to get out without a loss for yourself? In regards to mining-ships this translates to: do you fit for maximum ressource gathering per time unit to be able to build more ships, make more money, gain a structural advantage over the opponent or is it more important for you to get out safely? Itâs very similar, if not the same thing in the end.
And you can even connect the two. Letâs say you chose a Covetor to mine in and a Rupture comes and blaps you. Well, while this is unfortunate for you, the Rupture did well in stopping you from gaining an advantage over him. After all, he could have spend his time mining instead of going after you. The decision to not gather ressources at that moment, comes at the risk to be at a disadvantage should he not be able to destroy value of the opponent. Likewise, you could have chosen to go after someone else, but instead you went the path of trying to become richer instead of making others poorer and in how the game is designed, your choice is easier to pursue by that a completed mining cycle certainly nets you results, while a roam does not necessarily do that. The different activities within the PVPVE dynamic have and should have their own challenges, risks and so forth.
The idea that you should be able to follow your path of that PVPVE, gathering ressources, without the consequence of having to face people who go roaming, undermines the entire concept of a competetive game. You want to warp off the second someone enters local or lands on grid - fair enough. But this puts the activity of mining at an artificially high advantage against the activity of stopping people from mining, which is unbalanced and leads to over-importance of acquiring ressources and an under-importance of stopping others from doing the same.
Finally, I like your argument about the increased cost of PVP fits. Sure thing, that would happen and it probably should. The aforementioned over-importance of ressource allocation led us to a point in the game, where every member of Nullsec blobs has or can have a Supercarrier. Basically speaking this over-importance of mining vs fighting combined with the (given) difference in potential yield in different areas of space, has helped creating an imbalance that divides the playerbase into the old Nullblobbers and everybody else. Pardon my french, but this current situation is f*cking stupid. It does not feel like an intelligent gameplay challenge. It is not more than an exercise in kissing ass to superiors, giving up small corp culture in favor of anonymous labour for Nullblobs and 2nd grade math. Itâs offensively shallow for a game that prides itself to being for the smart ones.
Now, if PVP fits would become more expensive, what would be the problem with that? Would that not make your mining activities worth more in relation to now? Would that not also mean more diversity in choice of ships? Would that not help to correct a few misalignments in the risk/reward dynamic? And finally, would that not mean the Rupture pilot risks more by going to a roam, because unless heâs successful in destroying an opponents value, he loses relatively more because heâs not mining instead, compared to now.
1 Like
If it worked just fine, they would never replace it. Much to your surprise, it did NOT âworked just fineâ. It was a huge overhead on servers traffic.
Youâre leaving? Can I have your stuff?
Heâs telling you that reading forums is not part of his job at CCP. Heâs doing it in his free time and not responsible for anything that happens on forums. Pestering devs with forum mentions wonât âraise attentionâ. At most, it would only demonstrate your maturity.
Doesnât Discord (or other third party chat systems) have an API system that CCP could put to use for New Eden?
How will a new player ever get anywhere without the usual âkill everything that movesâ crowd instantly knowing they entered the system?
Oh wait, itâll help.
There are endless debates about local, but that which is given, takes away equally, or in the reverse. Only fools canât live without it, only fools canât survive with it.
Most of what local is used for is for bots to know when to dock up.
I was online with alts and friends, farming standing.
Once the fleet was called, I relogged alt window and found that the chat was disrupted. It did not connect to one of the player channels, the fleet chat was open with only alt present. Checking back to main, I saw the alt in fleet, marked offline.
Sending a message to channel at that moment was marked â-undeliveredâ, but only one.
1 Like