Where Fur and Strat Collide...

[beet1e]

Lazs,

If you are unable or willing to use the DA which, by the way, offeres everything you need, and given that there are problems with resets if we were to have subarenas/areas within an arena, then the only other alternative I can think of is for the TAS and BK to sit down together and design their own map - just as the AKs designed the pizza - and to submit it to HTC to be included in the weekly map rotation. Of course, the design would have to be approved by HTC.

[lazs2]

The DA does not have everything that I need.   Seperate arenas don't work.   RPS doesn't work.. all these things have been tried to death and proven to not work.

I would settle for more CV's and changing most/all of the V fields to A fields... This is allready gbeing done on the infinity map for instance and working much better.

My "area arena" is simply an ultimate solution as oppossed to all these band aid solutions tho.

If I had copies of the large maps I could carve one up to reflect the area concept.  It would take about 15 minutes... not a difficult thing to do.  getting the seperate reset thing would probly take a lot more time... I don't know... not a puter guy.
lazs

[CptTrips]

You mean like the furball we had going last night ...

Slap, I think you misunderstood our point.

We weren’t saying that there is a hard limit of 50 planes before the server crashes.  We're trying to talk about the rates at which the server load increases.

I think Curly and I are essentially trying to make the same points:

1.   For a given server hardware and server network connection, there is less stress and warpage when things are spread out to more smaller fights rather than fewer larger fights.  By spreading the load more evenly, HTC can support a larger total number of simultaneous players (therefore more profit), while still maintaining the same quality of experience.


2.   The rate at which the server load increases is (roughly) proportional to the square of the number of players in close visual proximity to each other.  Lets say we have a generic scalar load factor: L.  Lets say N is the number players in close visual proximity.  L ~= N^2.  Now lets take an example of 9 players in an arena.  If they are spread out into 3 fights of 3 separated by a sector each and each fight has a load of N^2 then the total arena load factor is L = (3^2) + (3^2) + (3^2) = 27.  If however all 9 are in close visual proximity then L =  9^2 = 81.  For the same number of players you can have a load of 27 vs 81. That’s a 200% increase.  Therefore, in this example, you can support 200% more players (i.e. 200% more profit) on the same infrastructure without increasing warpage just by controlling the density distribution.  


3.   Slow moving, early war planes will only exacerbate the problem.  They clump together and turn and burn rather than extend and climb.  A furball of early war planes will always tend to clump together in a smaller area than the same number of faster, late war planes.


I like a furballs too.  I might even like flying early war planes against other early war planes every once in a while.

But there is no way around it mathematically.  A large furball of early war planes all clumped up in a small area of the map would rob a disproportionate amount of the bandwidth from the rest of the arena.

Is the trade off worth it?  I dunno.  HT will have to decide.

Regards,
Wab

[lazs2]

wab... you seem to be saying that we cant have early war planes in the arena because too many people would enjoy em.

How do you take resources away from late war planes that don't even fight anyway?
lazs

[AKIron]

It's not just increased load on the server that congestion causes. Remember, all the planes in your vicinity cause network traffic to be sent to your PC through your Internet pipe. If you have a fat pipe like DSL or Cable then it'll likely be no problem, but if you have an analog dialup it will reach saturation and packets will be lost. I'm a visual kind of guy, I've posted pics to help illustrate this before, where'd I put 'em??

[AKIron]

Made a new one. Disregard dyslexic fingers.

[WldThing]

Originally posted by beet1e
Lazs,

If you are unable or willing to use the DA which, by the way, offeres everything you need, and given that there are problems with resets if we were to have subarenas/areas within an arena, then the only other alternative I can think of is for the TAS and BK to sit down together and design their own map - just as the AKs designed the pizza -

Come on beetle .. That would actually take WORK! Its easier to whine about the situation then actually do something about it..

[SlapShot]

Wab and Iron,

Thanks for your patience and detailed explanations. I'm a visual guy also Iron ... ... I do understand the concept.

I wasn't implying that you guys made a hard limit of 50 planes that would/could crash the server. One of you guys had made mention of 50 planes in a furball would be pumping out some serious data, which I agree (50^2 = 2500).

My pointing out last nights furball was to compare that 50 plane scenario to what we had going last night.

I'm not sure if we had 50 or more at peak times during that furball because it did ebb and flow as planes were knocked down and then had to fly back to the area, but there sure were, what I would consider, near max of what I would anticipate in the furball area.

With that in mind, I did not see any anomolies (warpage) that was out of the ordinary. If the server could handle last nights furball, I would think that the server could possibly handle the traffic that would be produced in a furball area without detrement to the rest of the areana.

I am not trying to dismiss your point, its very valid to HTC I am sure, I am just pointing out that some of the furballs that I have been in, especially the CV vs CV furballs, would have already shown what the high water mark would be for object position transmissions and the code would have already failed.

As for those who don't/can't have DSL/Cable, they deal with this currently (like when bomber formations dump). Until/Unless they upgrade, and this area was provided, then they would just have to deal with it some more or don't fly there.

Like Wab said ... its up to HT and HTC to decide .. we can only hope.

[beet1e]

WildThing

Lazs

How do you take resources away from late war planes that don't even fight anyway?

I know this is an emotive issue for you, but try to understand the networking implications as put forward by Wabbit and Iron. It's no BS.

Try this test - take off in an FM2 from an isolated field - no friends or cons around. Climb to 3K and level off. Press Ctrl+I to display video card details and note the frame rate. I don't know what vid. card you have, but if I did this, the rate would be around 60fps, or as much as 80 if over water with no terrain to render.  Now try upping in a GV in an area like Trinity Tank town where there might be 10 other vehicles within visual range appearing on your screen. If I did this, my frame rate would drop to about 25fps. Even on another map, the "clutter" (other vehicles/planes, fires, smoke) at a bombed out V-base will cause extra video rendering, and a sharp drop in frame rate.

An early war area would cause clumps of aircraft (or vehicles) which might degrade the entire server. Then again, we already have TTT doing that...

[AKIron]

Since I have never seen the netcode my observations are of course based on assumption. I'd be very curious to know how hitech transfers data between planes. Maybe he does some sort of time division multiplexing with say a 100 milisecond frame. That frame could allocate a fixed or variable slot for each plane in range and contain xyz and pitch/yaw/roll for each. This info could then be passed on to a higher level in the front end which might do the smoothing. Just speculating here, I'd appreciate anyone sharing their insight as to how it may work.

[Dead Man Flying]

Originally posted by AKWabbit
But there is no way around it mathematically.  A large furball of early war planes all clumped up in a small area of the map would rob a disproportionate amount of the bandwidth from the rest of the arena.

I think most everybody understands the efficiency aspect to lengthening field distances and purposefully spreading out the action.  It's the same logic that guided removing individual kill declarations and only announcing landed kills of two or more.

However, problems arise from unforeseen consequences that result from spreading out fields.  These consequences, in part, contribute to the feeling among some that Aces High has somehow changed for the worse.  These consequences include:

(1)  Generally longer transit times to fights.

(2)  Generally higher altitude fights due to the increased field distances allowing for greater climb times.

(3)  An increased emphasis on late war, fast planes to decrease transit time to and from these far bases.

(4)  Destroying base fuel affects fights relatively more than before due to longer flight distances.

    (a)  Reduced fuel availability disproportionately affects early war planes over late war planes.

    (b)  The increased value of fuel as a tactical target increases the likelihood that teams attack fuel depots by any means necessary, including suicide divebombing.

To name a few.  Others could identify more.  Some may see these consequences as positive things and others as negative.  Surely, however, they have changed the flavor of the game somewhat -- for better or for worse depending on personal tastes.

-- Todd/Leviathn

[AKcurly]

Originally posted by lazs2
wavbit and curly... I didn't ask for a furball arena... I asked for an early war area within the arena.  HT told me it was possible to have the seperate resets (said, "that would work").  Are you saying that there is no place for early war planes in a sim because they would tend to fight each other?

What you guys seem to be saying is that we can't have large furballs in an online sim because the servers can't handle it and that large maps with no action is the only option.   You map makers aren't just porking the game and making it unfun.... you are actually our friends and saving us from ourselves?

curly claims that if we had the early war area and it wasn't popular that it would be a waste of time and totally destroy gameplay.. That is not true.. If no one went there it would be a non issue.  There would be seperate resets so it wouldn't matter if either area were reset.. ever.   I think that there would probly be less guys in the early area but we will never know unless we try.  

And.... If is impossible to have real furballs in an online sim them what is all this bull about a seperate arena for furballers?  if they can't build an arena that can handle em then why bother?
 

Lazs, all I claim is that furballs generate more bandwidth consumption.  The problem should be made worse by the presence of early war planes.

You know those days in the MA when the server is struggling to push position updates to us?  You see planes all over the place?   Those days aren't always  the fault of HTC or even necessarily the fault of HTC's ISP.  Maybe a switch in Kansas City is oversold; maybe a new Outlook Express virus just hit the network.    Some days, the network just feels porked.

Let's face it, the internet wasn't designed to facilitate online gaming.   Hitech and crew have already pushed the envelope in facilitating massively multiplayer online gaming.  Let's hope they find a way to satisfy the guys who want to exclusively furball.

curly

[beet1e]

Originally posted by AKcurly
Hitech and crew have already pushed the envelope in facilitating massively multiplayer online gaming.  Let's hope they find a way to satisfy the guys who want to exclusively furball.

LOL

[CptTrips]

However, problems arise from unforeseen consequences that result from
spreading out fields.

If by "spreading out" you mean increasing the distance between fields I
agree with you.  I don't think you necessarily need to increase field
separation to distribute the fights.  The two newer maps might space the fields a tad farther than I prefer.  While there is no need to spread them out further, you don’t want to cram them too close together either.  In general, I think 0.75 sectors work best.  But I think 0.5 sectors would be too close.

There are other ways you can distribute thing evenly without moving the fields too far apart.  Avoid choke points, intersperse airfields with GV fields, etc.  

One of the most import means of regulating furballs is the role of the strat player.  As others have stated, eventually a furball gets to big or lasts too long, the strat can no longer resist and one of the fields gets closed or captured.  The furballers scatter and look for another place to begin to bunch up.  Wash, rinse, repeat.  Laz sees this as a problem, I see it as the natural life cycle of a furball.  Allowing furballs to develop is no more or less important than allowing strats to eventually disperse them.  Its part of the balance.  It is the way it should be.  It is the natural order of things.

What you don’t want to probably do is create an arena within an arena with fields too close together with invulnerable ack and uncapturable fields.  It would tend to promote on giant, bandwidth sapping furball rather than allowing the fights to be naturally distributed evenly across the arena.


Regards,
Wab

[lazs2]

so what I am getting here is that none of you really know what effects furballs have on the current arena or if they are even a problem or not but that you know that they have the potential to be?

As slap pointed out... we have large furballs now in some portions of the map... sometimes two or three at the same time.   If this is causing problems then that hasn't been stated by anyone at HTC.

Nobady changed some of the fields and CV issues to make the infinity map more furball friendly..  I have not heard that this caused any problems with the server or playerbase yet.

Fixing pizza the same way that infinity was fixed would be a good step towards making the arena more friendly for more players.

I am sorry tho but I don't buy the assumption that the server can't handle a few early war furballs especially when it would mean that those early war planes would no longer be in the late war area.   If it were a problem that was a local area update problem then all that would need to happen were that the people with outmoded equipment would avoid the furballs much as they do now.
lazs