Spacial overload in busy systems

EVE Technology and Research Center Player Features & Ideas
, ,
1

With another huge fight over and more complaints about countless people disconnecting and not being able to log back in potentially costing one side the fight I honestly think its time CCP does something about this.

We all love the idea of huge battles, honestly I do too reading about them brought me to the game, but there is a huge , no colossal disconnect between what we read and how it actually plays in game.

I don’t believe that putting a hard cap on the number of people in a system would be the right way to go, but I do believe that some form of mechanic should be put in place to encourage smaller fights, let me be clear when I say smaller I am referring to this mythical number that is small enough that tidi drops to about 50% but no lower, some tidi works its when it gets taken to extreme that it fails and the server just cant handle it and people get kicked.

Spacial Rift’s

This will work on a scaling system with the more people entering a system the worse the rift becomes and it’s effect’s increase.

Again numbers here are estimates the goal is to have the max number of players in a system while maintaining good tidi.

with 200 Players in system a spacial rift will spawn some where in local space, this rift will have no adverse effects yet, this rift will grow in size for each new additional pilot in system, as it grows it will begin to apply effects to the local system (like how some wormholes come with effects)

300 Pilots in space take a -5% to shield and armour recharge rate

350 Pilots in space take a -10% to shield and armour recharge rate

400 Pilots in space take a -25% to shield and armour recharge rate

1000 Pilots in space take a 50% reduction in shield and armour recharge rate
Pilots in space take a -25% to shield and armour recharge rate

1500 Pilots in space gain a 10% bonus to all types of dps
Pilots in space take a -25% to shield and armour recharge rate

2000 Pilots in space gain a 70% bonus to all types of dps
Pilots in space take a -25% to shield and armour recharge rate

With something like this, players can still have those huge 4000k player fights, but they wont last nearly as long as ships will die faster, the battle will end faster and players will take more severe losses, the point here is the most players will not want to take a fight like this, but they can if they have the balls and isk to put up with the loss.

The ultimate goal with a system like this would be that FC’s and battle commanders would need to strategically asses how many enemies are in system and then bring the right number of enemies to counter them without trigger an overly aggressive rift to spawn.

I think something like this, possibly not as I have defined above but a mechanic that works like this to discourage super massive fights would be better for the game long term, it would result in better fights with more action and no disconnects no lagging players and just a better all round battle for all involved…

2

No CCP should’ve spent all that money they wasted on new engine years ago so NO

3

yeah thats perfect logic right there…

4

So I log in 1000 alts to system in rokie ships and blap 25% weakier attackers with the single 50 % stronger citadel weapon.

The problem was not the awesome tank or DPS of player ships. It was 50000+ fighters flying around and making one second in game last 30 seconds of real time. Easier kills will be of no help here… But dedicated super server for super brawle can be of some help. And slowing down warp of new chars to cyno or gate in neighboring systems can also help. So rift - yes, but a transportational one. To keep reinforcements away from the battle.

5

who said that citadels would not also be affected, it would apply to all damage and all shields, if you flood the system your only ■■■■■■■ yourself as well.

6

I like the idea of a scaling mechanic to help with enormous fights, but I feel this would change the meta too much. A fit that works for normal fleet fights would probably be garbage for 2000 man fleet fights, and I would essentially have to design a new fleet just for fights that we anticipate would escalate.

As cheesy as it sounds, at very high numbers in local, perhaps you could change the max number of fighters you can launch to a single squadron for a carrier or 2 for supers, one heavy and one light, and limit number of drones launched to 1, and increase bandwidth requirements of drones by 500% (with a few special exceptions for Gurista’s ships). At the same time, increase the amount of damage your drones/fighters do to compensate for the fewer drones/fighters on field. This would limit server workload, with relatively minor effects on balance and gameplay.

7

I was going to like @erg_cz’s comment until he went into the transportation of supers off-grid. Hard pass, capitals are meant to be supported. They’re meant to support.

Taking them off grid to duke it out clashes completely with their role.

He was, however, 100% on-the-nose with his comment about fighters. There were a fucktonne of them, and I’ve seen TiDi pin itself from 30% up to 90% the very second the command to launch fighters is given.

Forcing the caps off-grid is certainly not an answer. Making ships easier to kill, again, not the answer.

Honestly, if strategic elements were added that could be on other nodes, that would dramatically increase the ability to scale the size battle. But a thread I just put up on consolidating fighters into a single squadron would probably do wonders for server performance as well.

8

fighters are not the sole cause tho mega fights like this without them are still slide show mess’s .

we need something , if not the idea I suggest then something else that achieves the same goal, something that makes the people fighting want to bring a more manageable number of people and not just always pings “Bring everything , if you cant fly doctrine bring your shuttle” because this is just not fun for anyone.

It’s funny tho, its like Stockholm syndrome, after the fight after a few days people start talking about it like it was epic and the best thing they ever did, but during the same fight those same people are just begging to find a reason to log out and goto bed.

9

I was there from start to finish. Or at least, while I was able to stay connected. I was logged in when the node crashed. I was also waterboarded in a capital by some very determined goons as we painfully flew a super fleet across New Eden. When I found out that TAPI was anchoring another keep in UALX, my first question was “hell yes, when’s the formup?” (incidentally, mad props to TAPI for the barrel they’ve got us over in UALX at the moment, that’s some next-gen level ■■■■ right there).

I do agree with you that fighters are not the sole cause… but they’re a significant one. At the end of the day, we’ll always cram more people in if we can. The moment CCP makes it stable for 4k people, we’ll try to put 5 in. So on and so forth.

Splitting people across multiple server nodes is absolutely a good goal to have… but forcing anything is very counter-sandbox. After a few other keepstar fights, my previous suggestion (burried somewhere in these forums) was to make it possible for systems to run on multiple nodes - for example, split the system into 4 or 5 different slices. Then put a strategic objective in each that makes significant impact on the actual structure fight. Whoever controls it gets that advantage.

The players decide where they want to be that way. More sandboxy than “■■■■, all our capitals just got sucked into a thing”.

10

Awesome. So all I have to do is put a whole bunch of alpha alts into Jita and I get a DPS bonus for my suicide ganks? I love this plan.

11

That already can be done but nobody ever does it because it’s a losing strat. An attacker can easily create objectives on 2+ nodes. Just reinforce stuff in multiple system and bingo. You now have 3 objectives at the same time on 3 different nodes. (Unless you get really unlucky and the system are randomly mapped on the same node of course) Too bad that does not really work because the enemy can just send his whole armada on objectives 1, wipe the fleet there and then move to objectives 2 and so on.

Unless they rewrite large parts of the game to make putting all your dudes together a bad move, it is never going away and if I had to bet money on it, my guess is they will not make it change.

12

Not entirely true.

“Command Center” node somewhere else in system (node in space with grid on separate physical server), offering 50% change in dps cap. Whoever controls it can swing it either for or against the structure (50% higher or lower, person in control of the node decides). 3 way slider, you can have it in the middle where it does nothing.

“Ancillary Power Relay Substation” node elsewhere which increases/reduces the cap recharge of the structure by 50%.

Incentivizing people to take the objective just means making it important enough to control. I know for certain those two alone would be amazingly useful. Many other options such as resistances, dps output/tracking, etc, exist as well if you start to think about ways you could swing the battle.

13

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.