It would live locally on any spare machines players have, not acting as a dedicated server (it runs no game client and has no authority to alter background sim server data) but simply as a seed node for creating islands. Kind of like a server-lite. It's hard to describe and type out on a phone lol - but it would simply be a pre-made island for players to jump into, instead of them having to create/merge upon login as happens just now. It just skips that step and logon happens to the island generated by the points, which will probably already have got players in them. All it would do is maintain links between matchmaking server and islands, basically like an Elite-dedicated router.
Message to FD from everyone in Open. Please stop everything and fix instancing/matchmaking first.
- Thread starter Majinvash
- Start date
Ah, ok sort of like an Elite Dangerous version of Seti@HOME.
That's a very good description! It would be entirely voluntary, a peer-based torrent like mesh of pre-existing island owners for game clients to use. It's just an idea, and very possibly impossible to implement, but it would be an interesting idea for players to volunteer rigs to give Elite a boost 
I know you're fast to say it doesn't... But... why does this issue happen more frequently--wait, FAR more frequently in systems with exceptionally high AI traffic than ones that have very little?
I've been interacting with players on a almost daily basis since December.
That's a very good description! It would be entirely voluntary, a peer-based torrent like mesh of pre-existing island owners for game clients to use. It's just an idea, and very possibly impossible to implement, but it would be an interesting idea for players to volunteer rigs to give Elite a boost
+1 for at least coming up with a creative solution.
If there was a client that we could voluntarily install (even better could run on a raspberry pi) I could see it working if Frontier gave some incentive to install it.
It could mine credits like bitcoins.
Last edited:
Well that was what was originally stated by Frontier quite some time ago I believe.
NPCs would be easier to handle. Everyone has a consistent client and AI code so you can pass far less data around to keep them in sync.
because polls usually return undesired results.
But see, the thing is, you don't always see AI that other people see, just like you don't always see people that other people see. I've seen this repeatedly when playing in a wing. Even if we have identical AI code, that doesn't mean it reacts the same for everyone. I'm willing to bet our AI is a bit more advanced than a simple flowchart. Someone needs to take over master instancing the AI so everyone sees it reacting identically.
I can't help but think there is some sort of connection between high AI levels and instance limits from what I've seen over and over.
lol, 'don't speak for me, I dont want things to work properly', lmao, are you guys seriously like that? Im at a loss for words.
Glad to hear FD is working on these issues, maybe we could work on some of our own, eh?
Glad to hear FD is working on these issues, maybe we could work on some of our own, eh?
Well I didn't say it worked perfectly. But as far as I know the theoretical limit to the number of players in an instance didn't include AI.
However, since some sort of network sync is involved regarding the NPCs or other furniture I'm sure that if things get busy it would certainly have implications on the instance.
With all due respect, rolling over and giving up is not the solution. A lot of "combat logs" aren't even the traditional combat log, it's people in pythons, FDLs, condas, and other ships with strong shields. With the advent of shield boosters you can get all of these ships close to or well over 1000MJ of shields; it's no issue for people in large ships to pop a SCB, head to main menu, and exit after waiting 15 seconds. With 4 points to shields even with a full wing attacking them it's highly unlikely they will even lose shields, and even more unlikely that they actually will be killed before they finish the log out. This situation could be easily remedied by increasing the timer to 30 or 45 seconds.
On the subject of "ungraceful exits" as you people put as the definition for combat logging in the tradition sense, if I remember right telelmetry is already being logged on unexpected client crashes, and in this telemetry different aspects are logged, such as "number of human players nearby" and "under fire" and "in immediate danger". I'd say this gives a partially adequate method of feedback of determining whether someone combat logged, and at the very least it's a start. A decent solution would be a system like many other games that punishes an unexpected absence (dota or csgo for example); on the first offence do nothing; second offense do a 2 hr ban, 3rd offense 8hrs, 4th offense 1 day, then 3, 7, 14, etc days; with the punishment stepping up for each log. Accidental logouts, crashes and loss of connections could be identified using the aforementioned telemetry, and in the event that someone honest-to-god did lose connection during a pvp engagement, they would most likely not have a prior history of combat logging and only get a warning or 30min-2hr ban.
- - - Updated - - -
I only just saw your response to this, and to address this again, if it is intended this is a very, very bad game mechanic, as it allows players in larger ships to stock up on a shield tanking loadout and immediately log out whenever they are in danger. Essentially it gives people who spend 50mil+credits on a ship a get out of jail free card, which is so completely broken and unbalanced I'm not even going to get into all the problems with it.
I never really understand these "FD drop EVERYTHING and do this!" requests, what, you want the whole team to drop everything else? Not just every single programmer but also every artist, animator and game designer?
I play on open, and I rather they kept doing what they were doing now, they'll fix it when it becomes the next highest thing on their priority list.
I play on open, and I rather they kept doing what they were doing now, they'll fix it when it becomes the next highest thing on their priority list.
Sounds like a personal hardware problem...
Anyone who is hung up on Maj's assertion about speaking for them is obviously having difficulty with the act of thinking.
Yes, stopping everything to fix instancing is justified in a multiplayer game where people are trying to 'make their own story' by involving other ships. With concentrated effort the problem can be solved and the most annoying aspect of Elite can be sorted out.
Waiting 45mins for someone to come out of a station, following them for four or more systems and then losing them because of instancing is not only soul destroying it makes you literally (and I use the term correctly) hate the game a little.
Yes, stopping everything to fix instancing is justified in a multiplayer game where people are trying to 'make their own story' by involving other ships. With concentrated effort the problem can be solved and the most annoying aspect of Elite can be sorted out.
Waiting 45mins for someone to come out of a station, following them for four or more systems and then losing them because of instancing is not only soul destroying it makes you literally (and I use the term correctly) hate the game a little.
Last edited:
Totally hung up and not thinking. FD are aware of the problems, anyone can participate in helping with this issue. https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=160601
Because this isn't news to me Im not going to say they should 'drop everything' either, again, they are aware and working on it. People being people is silly, that's my take.
Because this isn't news to me Im not going to say they should 'drop everything' either, again, they are aware and working on it. People being people is silly, that's my take.
Last edited:
Some people me be trying to "make their own story by involving other ships", I am not. I play in Open a lot but it's not the core of the game for me.
Hence he isn't speaking for me, and I'm not hard of thinking.
Why do so many threads on this forum seem to go straight to childish bickering, trolling and drama? It puts me off reading many of them because you have to wade through pages of drivel to actually find any relevant arguments or information.
OK maybe the OP doesn't technically speak for absolutely everyone who logs into Open.
OK maybe the "stop everything" was an unfortunate way to phrase it
It's fair to assume that people logging into open do so because they wish to interact with other players and it's true that this has some major issues for people.
It's fair enough to request that fixing a fundamental mechanic be addressed as a priority above focusing on new features.
It seems to me that is all the OP was really saying so do we really need any more outraged "you don't speak for me" posts?
OK maybe the OP doesn't technically speak for absolutely everyone who logs into Open.
OK maybe the "stop everything" was an unfortunate way to phrase it
It's fair to assume that people logging into open do so because they wish to interact with other players and it's true that this has some major issues for people.
It's fair enough to request that fixing a fundamental mechanic be addressed as a priority above focusing on new features.
It seems to me that is all the OP was really saying so do we really need any more outraged "you don't speak for me" posts?