The Star Citizen Thread V2.0

[Tinman]

The docking permission issue in ED is not a netcode issue as such...rather connected to the AI. The NPCs (that was added with the Beta) apparently "steals" slots more than they should right now.

 

[dumbo]

The docking permission issue in ED is not a netcode issue as such...rather connected to the AI. The NPCs (that was added with the Beta) apparently "steals" slots more than they should right now.

In my experience, there seems to be 2 different failures:
- docking refused (due to lack of slots).
- docking request timed out (due to a failure somewhere).

I suspect the second one might be network-related rather than a scripting problem .

 

[Voivod]

Err, yes? I was just posting my opinion on the current state of ED

So how about "correcting" your opinion based on the different facts presented to you instead of ignoring them or simply antagonizing them?

 

[mid_gen]

Sorry mate. I'm not getting dragged into this. I've only just got out of the slammer. 30 days and the big lifetime ban for my next offence. As such I'm sure you'll understand if I leave you to find someone else who'd like to play.

Laters guys.

@ Coda - I'm your biggest fan!

There's nothing to get dragged into! It's just some people posting some comments about a game, it's not a land war in Asia :S

 

[mid_gen]

So how about "correcting" your opinion based on the difference facts presented to you instead of ignoring them or simply antagonizing them?

I haven't seen any facts that make me think any differently. I've seen other people's opinions, I don't have to agree with them. Why are you so bothered that my opinions must match yours?

 

[dumbo]

I say should. It may not all be working yet. However, the high bandwidth usage during supercruise exit makes me think something else is going on.

Yep, I deal with networking from time-to-time, and I still don't pretend to understand these problems...

If they can fix it, great. If not, I'll play offline.

The dynamic universe is already there in its infancy. The economy will change based on supply and demand, but you're right: there's an awful lot still to come. No different to SC in that regard.

I see the dynamic universe as perhaps the most key feature of Elite. The mission system requires the dynamic universe to work properly, it's also the way that players can modify their environment.

This one feature could make a *huge* difference to people's experience - taking the game from 'truckers anonymous' to 'Han Solo: the simulator' or 'FireFly'. I really hope FD nail it .

 

[Voivod]

Besides, as people are so keen to point out, ED isn't 'about' player combat, so it's not a criticism, just horses for courses.

A lot of people have also said the opposite.
FD has said that PvP is a major part of their game.

I haven't seen any facts that make me think any differently. I've seen other people's opinions, I don't have to agree with them.

You criticized the current state of Elite PvP or more precise the lack of it.
Could you tell me what PvP features of those intended for release exist in the current client?

 

[mid_gen]

A lot of people have also said the opposite.
FD has said that PvP is a major part of their game.

You criticized the current state of Elite PvP or more precise the lack of it.
Could you tell me what PvP features of those intended for release exist in the current client?

The amount of PvP has dropped sharply since increasing to just 55 systems, as you simply do not see as many players. Partly people playing solo/private, partly its just numbers. With the headline release feature of 400,000,000,000 systems (that's still correct right?) , even given an optimistic post-release user bump of 10x, it's really not likely that player interactions are going to be be a major feature.

Anyway, you're putting words in my mouth again. I don't criticize ED for this fact. That's just what the game is, you and your ship in a vast lonely galaxy, occasionally coming across other commanders. I think the combat and flight model is great.

My only criticism is the network setup, it does not deliver a good enough experience for multiplayer combat in my experience. The experiences I have had are entirely consistent with the understood shortcomings of a P2P architecture. I'm sure some, even most people have no problems, I'm happy for them.

 

[Bains]

There's nothing to get dragged into! It's just some people posting some comments about a game, it's not a land war in Asia :S

Since subtext eludes you let me put it this way.

When your opening gambit involves labeling others on the thread as dullard fanboys, openly calling members trolls, and least of all, making unfavourable comparisons with a game you have yet to play, and a portion of which does not even exist, and all the while pretending you have no axe to grind...

...then I must judge the chances of this conversation being anything other than fractious and pointless as remote to non existent. If in doing so I have sold you short, and by doing so missed out on a civilised and illuminating meeting of minds, then I'll just have to live with that. Truth be told I'm pretty sure I'm doing myself a favour.

I hope that clarifies things for you.

 

[Thargon]

http://youtu.be/z1EtTfEVpDM?t=18m31s

Latest Around the Verse episode on the website.

I see someone in the background is hard at work watching the football

 

[Bains]

http://youtu.be/z1EtTfEVpDM?t=18m31s

Latest Around the Verse episode on the website.

I see someone in the background is hard at work watching the football

...(cough) ...I watch football when I'm working.

 

[huzeeta]

http://youtu.be/z1EtTfEVpDM?t=18m31s

Latest Around the Verse episode on the website.

I see someone in the background is hard at work watching the football

Constellation variants were teased:

Spoiler

edit: possible Elite-SC-crosspromo at PAX prime (reverse the verse... maybe heard it wrong) (something something CR with Braben something something)

 

[philux]

I think that's where you're misunderstanding. ED's networking is a P2P-server hybrid model where the local instance state is maintained by the P2P network and global persistent state is governed by a server.

Things like system location, ship health, reputation, cargo, vouchers, etc. should be persisted to the global server in real-time, whereas transient stuff like position, thruster power, cargo scoop deployment will be maintained in the local P2P network.


ED instances are governed by the main server. Matchmaking is done on the main server. Determination of who you can see is done by the main server. Once you've been matched with and joined an instance, the 'twitch' combat is done on the P2P network.

All the problems that I've seen recently boil down to the P2P network taking a long time to sort itself out. I don't see why that should be, so I'm edging towards most of those problems being nasty timing bugs, and when they've been sorted out the overall experience should be a lot nicer (including when the P2P master drops out of the game).

Yep, but the session is still hosted on the participating client machines which leaves all kind of key risks to pure luck (e.g., network stability, computer performance, computer failure, etc.). The QoS you get from such an approach cannot match at all the one of dedicated servers connected to a high-speed network backbone.

 

[mid_gen]

Since subtext eludes you let me put it this way.

When your opening gambit involves labeling others on the thread as dullard fanboys, openly calling members trolls, and least of all, making unfavourable comparisons with a game you have yet to play, and a portion of which does not even exist, and all the while pretending you have no axe to grind...

...then I must judge the chances of this conversation being anything other than fractious and pointless as remote to non existent. If in doing so I have sold you short, and by doing so missed out on an illuminating discourse then I'll just have to live with that. Truth be told I'm pretty sure I'm doing myself a favour.

I hope that clarifies things for you.

Any labels I may have chucked about were aimed at the strange person who greeted my initial post with a tirade of fanboy nonsense. Subsequent responses have been much more meaningful, albeit unnecessarily defensive and trying to make an argument out of a bit of discourse. No axes being ground here.

Meh, whatever

 

[Voivod]

The amount of PvP has dropped sharply since increasing to just 55 systems, as you simply do not see as many players. Partly people playing solo/private, partly its just numbers. With the headline release feature of 400,000,000,000 systems (that's still correct right?) , even given an optimistic post-release user bump of 10x, it's really not likely that player interactions are going to be be a major feature.

You do know that most NPC activity (and hence P activity) will be centralized around certain systems right?
Not everyone is going out to explore the 400bil systems.
Their existence doesn't mean that the player populous will be divided among them...

Anyway, you're putting words in my mouth again. I don't criticize ED for this fact. That's just what the game is, you and your ship in a vast lonely galaxy, occasionally coming across other commanders. I think the combat and flight model is great.

No, you criticized it based on a wrong idea you have. You're under the impression that everyone will go out exploring. Again, most players will be around the systems where most NPC features will be centralized.

My only criticism is the network setup, it does not deliver a good enough experience for multiplayer combat in my experience. The experiences I have had are entirely consistent with the understood shortcomings of a P2P architecture.

Well FD chose it for a reason, it should work for them, they said it should work... so we'll have to wait and see.

You still didn't answer my question about how many of the PvP features have been implemented in beta.

 

[mid_gen]

You do know that most NPC activity (and hence P activity) will be centralized around certain systems right?
Not everyone is going out to explore the 400bil systems.
Their existence doesn't mean that the player populous will be divided among them...

No, you criticized it based on a wrong idea you have. You're under the impression that everyone will go out exploring. Again, most players will be around the systems where most NPC features will be centralized.

Well FD chose it for a reason, it should work for them, they said it should work... so we'll have to wait and see.

You still didn't answer my question about how many of the PvP features have been implemented in beta.

I'm aware there are plenty of features, such as player interdiction and the like, that are still to come in for PvP.

BUT....player interactions have markedly decreased in my experience in a relatively minor increase up to 55 systems, and this is when you can now see people in SC that you couldn't before, *and* there's been a big influx of players, *and* comms have been added. It's not a great leap in my view to think that increasing the playing world by a factor of millions is not going to lead to greater player interaction, and hence player v player combat.

You think differently? Cool I guess one of us is going to have egg on their face when it does go live and there will be facts to discuss. Can't say I mind either way as I'll be heading out to deep space ASAP

 

[Voivod]

I'm aware there are plenty of features, such as player interdiction and the like, that are still to come in for PvP.

That's why there's no proper PvP right now. All that pvpers can do is wait outside a station and grief/fight other players.
The number of systems is completely irrelevant.
People who want to kill other people will go where most people are or at places where PvP is encouraged.

Also I think the issues that affect friends and wrong instances are also issues that affect people seeing other (non-friend) people. We most certainly haven't seen anything close to the max players per instance cap (though beta is obviously more populated than premium beta)

 

[Trash Gordon]

Yep, but the session is still hosted on the participating client machines which leaves all kind of key risks to pure luck (e.g., network stability, computer performance, computer failure, etc.). The QoS you get from such an approach cannot match at all the one of dedicated servers connected to a high-speed network backbone.

I wonder if they adressed host migration differently than COD MW2 or GTA 5 because that stuff is horrible.

It basicly meant that often if the hosting client player started loosing a match he would quit having everyone freeze for 30 seconds.

GTA 5 is just horrible stability wise I had sessions stoping every 5 min. , there are bad dedicated servers aswell but from my experience P2P hosting didnt do to good in comparison.

 

[Andrew Sayers]

It's really annoying being in an instance happily plinking away at NPCs, only to have a player drop in and have the instance fall apart and have to log out and back in to get a decent experience again.

If you're getting this consistently, make sure to file a ticket (I guess you'll need to attach your network log to the report). You might be hitting some edge case the devs haven't tested.

 

[psyron]

Oh dear, still the same sub-topic going on?! And i see i missed nothing.

Generallly i ask myself why people who obviously prefer SC over ED have to comment on this on an ED forum.
Two possible reasons:
a) They want to encourage ED to become better
b) They want to recruite new backers for CIG's money hungry black hole ...

I have that feeling it's more about "b" and i do not see why i should support this attitude!