Hard to believe after all these year

[Spacetramp_Drago]

He has no need to, CCP should have the expertise to sort it out.

But he does have the right to complain.

[Molea_Enjoyer]

@Dyver_Phycad

Distribute the load to more systems. If a large battle for a structure is about to happen, the main target is not relevant to the fight any longer. Instead, it spawns nodes in several systems that you need to hold as owner for the timer to get the structure process to go through, or hold as the hostile to prevent the timer from ticking up. We already have this kind of mechanic with opposing timer progression from Insurgencies, FW influence, even Sov Node Warfare.

No more single point big battles in one system but spread out battles with several fleets in several systems all being useful and actually able to do something. If the tech is not there for big battles, prevent the big battles altogether, without preventing the big fights. Spread it out on several nodes instead. That tech is already there, it has already proven itself successful in distributing unreasonable server loads, and it should be applied to anything that goes beyond practical system loads the server can reasonably handle.

this is the answer

[Glenduil]

Always people bitching about the game developers. CCP could expand everything to heights that aren’t even possible and people would still call them lazy and incompetent.

@Dyver_Phycad

they should not just focus on improving their tech stack and instead focus on better mechanics that can cope with the player behavior. So far, CCP does neither successfully nor in a focused manner.

Yep. Spoken like a new complainer. Can you prove with actual data that CCP has never once focused on mechanics that “can cope with player behavior”? You said they have never done so “in a successful or focused manner”. Can you prove that? They’ve had 22 years so please prove that it’s never happened.

[Dyver_Phycad]

Before I engage with you, you ought to inject and train Reading Comprehension to level 3, at least. We (or I am at the very least) are talking about big structure battles, not any other gameplay feature with big fights. Since you do not understand that and since you rather indulge in misrepresenting talking points of others, there’s no reason to answer your question.

[Glenduil]

okay, but that was your claim.

[Chupi_fantastika]

3,000 players is more than the population of full servers in other MMOs

[Syzygium]

@Malak_Starfire

What are you proposing as an alternative?

A sov and structure-warfare design that requires to take multiple goals at the same time. So not thousands of people are fighting on one grid, doing basically not more than watching a module cycling each 3 minutes or going from full to “oh I will be in my home station in like 10 minutes…” white screen… or worse, facing a 10 minute blackscreen on login just to find out they were already being killed and podded before they could load the grid.

EVE needs game mechanics that limits the benefits from bringing “more and more F1 grunts” or at some point even punishes blobbing by giving ever-decreasing return-of-investment for more pilots but at the same time rewards having a splitted fleet with 3, 5, 10 subsquads fighting for subgoals in different locations but need to coordinate via communications to make sure they synergize. So those fights could be run at different nodes, but count toward a common goal. Defending a single location with 2.000 chars simply wouldn’t help if the opponent takes 4 of 5 other locations with 300 chars each then.
So you have content for thousands of mobilized players but still doable for the server without significant lagfests.

[Malak_Starfire]

So what already exists…got it. BTW, I was not asking you. I was asking people who actually do these things.