Forming an Armada.

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
If I, as a player, can rise to the level of owning and commanding a cap ship how can the lone wolf still exist as a viable gameplay option? Why would the player artificially confine themselves to a "lesser" existence when they know the challenge of the game can lead them to a more "coveted" position? If it's possible to attain the kind of money that will buy a cap ship, what will I, as a lone wolf in a (relatively) small vessel, choose to do with the all this money I have? Will I just choose to be a gazillionaire in a tiny ship that constantly gets swatted by players with cap ships and armadas? Why?

If the game design limits us to be being small parts of the big picture and gives us enough to do within the confines of that vision then we never need cap ships or more. The essence of the game stays the same as its currently is.

People often say "well what happens when I have everything and tonnes of money" but it's a dead-end argument... what happens when you have a cap ship and a fleet that can trample everything and exponentially increase their money? You can always say "what then?" as an argument but it really serves no purpose.

The "coveted position" proposition should not be an issue with "lone wolves" precisely because by definition they prefer a different gamplay style altogether.

I believe there are many ways to incentivize and motivate "capital ship" related gameplay in EVE without cannibalizing "lone wolves". The chief reaosn being that the galaxy is 400 billions star big, to start with! :D

Plus I am hopeful FD is creative enough to consider all those in a non "mutually exclusive" way. It is enough for me so far to see that DB himself is also equally hopeful for Capital Ship gameplay, over time.
 
Last edited:
What would be really nice would be a single server type of set up.
Where instances with no players or very few players dont need to have resources allocated to them.
High population areas would then get more resources.

The resources aren't on Frontier's end. When you jump into a system, and nobody else is there, it's your computer that's acting as the "server". If someone else jumps in, your computer and their computer talk P2P to share information about the instance.

Thus the 32-limit, that's how many players your computer will be acting as a server to at once.

Now comes the science bit...

Let's say you and your friends, all live locally to you, jump into a system and blockade the station. You're going to have a pretty decent ping time (the round-trip time for a packet of data from you, the server, to them and back to you).

Let's say that's 35ms.

Let's also say your computers are clipping along at 60fps, aka a frame every 17ms.

Your friend presses fire on their joystick, that will take up to 17ms to be processed by their computer and placed on the network, and then another 17ms (half the ping) to get to you, and another 17ms for your computer to process that and send it out to another of your friends, 17ms to get to them, and 17ms for their computer to update that.

That's 87ms for the fire to move from one player to another.

For the reply to come back, that's another 87ms.

So when your friend presses fire, their computer doesn't get the confirmation all the other player computers have agreed that something was fired for 174ms.

Just under 1/6th of a second. Imagine playing a game at 6 FPS ... that's what the network code is really doing.

And that's with you all playing in the same geographical region.

Let's add another player into the mix, one in Cambridge, UK. That's 5,323 miles from my house. Conveniently I have lots of friends there, so can ping a server and figure out a RTT.

It's 160ms.

So now let's plug those numbers in, from the time your friend presses fire on the joystick, to the time that the Cambridge player receives that, and the time it takes for the response from their computer to get all the way back.

One way is 17ms processing + 17ms half-ping to you + 17ms processing + 80ms half-ping to them + 17ms processing

So 150ms to get all the way over the atlantic, then another 150ms back.

300ms. Or a 1/3rd of a second. Fancy playing a game at 3 FPS?

Some very clever networking programming can reduce that nightmareish scenario down a bit, but you're still dealing with a fundamental speed-of-light problem.

You just can't get a packet from the US West Coast to the UK faster than 150ms.

And that's the other reason instances are there, so I can play a game with friends in my local area and be able to have responsive gameplay even while someone in the UK is doing something else in that system.
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
No point being a wolf if you're surrounded by tyrannosaurs.

Where exactly in the 400 billions of stars in the galaxy would you expect to be surrounded?

Irony mode off ;) , tbh I am pretty sure (at least I hope) that given some creative thinking by FD and the help of the galaxy size there will be ways to allow for all gameplay styles to co-exist merrily. Even complementarily:

As commander of a "small" and overall inexperienced player based battlegroup of, say, a couple Anacondas, 5 Cobras and 8 Eagles escorting a Battlecruiser who are trying to defend a key resource outer rim (tm) world from another player based assault I may one day actually need your "lone wolf" ace piloting skills to help us through... for a fee. Once the battle is won thanks to your help and the reward cashed in you would disappear again into the void looking for new quests and maybe never to be seen in these parts again...

At any rate, this will only happen over time, if at all, so as you say, not to worry.
 
Last edited:
I like the idea of capital ships, I'm just not sure how you can make them compatible with the ED gameplay as it looks at the moment.

I am a solo player but one who wants to exist in a multiplayer universe. however as a solo player in games like EVE and WOW you are shut out of the "End Game" you can't achieve the things that groups do.

This makes me worry that ED with capital ships would make it so only groups of players could control them. (either by making them multiplayer only, or simply making them too expensive for a single player to run them, a la EVE)

What turned me off EVE were the barriers to progress for solo players, I really don't want to see any of the following traits of EVE or WOW in ED:

Groups of players independently holding systems.

Super expensive items (Capital Ships) that can only be bought by "corporations"

"Raids" that require multiple players to complete.


I think the General idea is for small groups of players and that Solo players like myself can hire NPC wingmen to help out when necessary. That is the game I want to play.

So for me Cap ships yes, as long as they can be make to fit with the solo player gameplay.
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
Freudian slip there?

Touché! :D Daimn.

I think I played EVE for no more than 2 weeks way back then before I realized it wasnt for me and "left it on the shelf" to be forgotten tbh.

I am just so used to get the EVE treatment here whenever we discuss PVP or capital ships that I must be becoming a victim of the Stockholm Syndrome :D.
 
Back
Top Bottom