Too many instances?

[Ellsworth]

The more we hear about the game, the more it sounds like every single quest or "episode" will take place in an instanced arena.

Will we be able to beam down to a planet on a mission and pass other Captains on the road who are doing other missions?

One great thing about WoW was that you could run around the world doing almost any quest with almost anyone around you.

So will we be able to fly our ships through a system - coming accross another captain in battle, and joining in to help him win the battle?

If I am on a planet and a high level captain runs by will I be able to ask him to help me kill off the klingons?

Or will I be alone the entire game as a single player? (other than when I visit a starbase)

[Rota]

well if i understand what someone described to me from CO every zone is going to be instanced.
when you enter a zone you choose from a list of 200 instance versions of that zone. basically it's like having 200 servers for every zone and you. So 50 people can all be in the same zone at the same building sitting in the same chair. and all be in different instances of that zone and all be alone.

confusing. I hope i can get used to it.

[thefrayl]

If it's anything like CO, these "Instances" (Except for mission locales) are open to all, but they are limited in population. You could have, let's say 120 players on each instance of Earth orbit. They are identical to each other, just with different players populating the area. You can jump between these instances at ease if you so wish. You can also have the game automatically choose the best instance for you, or be able to manually select the instance you want to go to before 'zoning'.

Likened to WoW, these Instances are more like servers.

well if i understand what someone described to me from CO every zone is going to be instanced.
when you enter a zone you choose from a list of 200 instance versions of that zone. basically it's like having 200 servers for every zone and you. So 50 people can all be in the same zone at the same building sitting in the same chair. and all be in different instances of that zone and all be alone.

confusing. I hope i can get used to it.

It is worthwhile to note that these "40 player instances" many people speak of are the n00b zones in CO. 120+ player instances seem to be the norm for open areas beyond that. And it sounds like a headache, but I can assure you it's not. Especially when you let the game choose which instance you go to. It works great, and I've never felt like I'm in an inconsistent world.

[laladiel]

If it's anything like CO, these "Instances" (Except for mission locales) are open to all, but they are limited in population. You could have, let's say 120 players on each instance of Earth orbit. They are identical to each other, just with different players populating the area. You can jump between these instances at ease if you so wish. You can also have the game automatically choose the best instance for you, or be able to manually select the instance you want to go to before 'zoning'.

Likened to WoW, these Instances are more like servers.

sounds like how eq2 used to be.

[Rota]

Well I'm sure fleets will have policies like "always choose instance 17". Thus increasing the likelihood you will run into and interact with fleet members and friends of the fleet with same policy. So I hope there's a setting to always choose instance #X as long as X or greater instances exist

[thefrayl]

Well I'm sure fleets will have policies like "always choose instance 17". Thus increasing the likelihood you will run into and interact with fleet members and friends of the fleet with same policy. So I hope there's a setting to always choose instance #X as long as X or greater instances exist

I am hoping for the same. I have yet to test that aspect of instancing in CO. I was more about soloing, learning the ins and outs while hunting for bugs than teaming up and socializing. That will change tomorrow.

I would love a 'lock' option to keep you on the same instance.

[THORN74]

if its like CO, the shards are all the same but support a limited population. So u wount see as many people wandering around or dancing, but there will be crowds. each shard has a population of over 100 players, and there is a list of shards to pick from. this list allows you to pick which u want but also displays the population and weather u have friends on that shard or not.

the individual mission instances are just like WOW only ur team/group will be visable, no matter how many people are working on the same mission.

just remember the populations we have seen for each shard have been in BETA so that number could change in either direction (bigger or smaller) once the game hit the shelves.

[SenshiBat]

Depends on Caps for Population.. But you find in Star Fleet Command for 'instance' a big fleet population base in dynaverse servers as key to having the Spirit of Team work re-kindled.

CO was difficult to team up as the servers filled quickly and the Friends list bugs.. made for bad form of pestering them wit PMS to try and group of the tougher mish..

IF they can tighten that up in early ALpha going Closed.. it would really help the flow of testing.

[saint100]

Ahhhhh I see. I think I understand, that way we can all head to DS9 on day one, but be in (ahem) paralell universes and not grinding the server to halt. The kind of problems Eve did / does suffer from.

As someone above said, if you're in a fleet you can having a setting to find the same instance. Next problem is whether there is a cap on each instance (assume so), which could lead to half your fleet not getting in. - Or would a fleet be able to 'create' it's own instance for them selves?

[Rekkert]

I like how the intances idea work, but they'll have to be careful while implementing it.

[SenshiBat]

Right Friends that the key.. The Beta for CO when from small groups to 100 over the months of testing.. for population.. giving plenty of roomfor friends list to grow.. so chances were you would see somebody you new running around even in large populations.

you would have log jams at different missions.. so you have to jump around the map to finish other items.

The STO universe is so much larger it comes down to Having 10 Shards up each with their own version of DS9 to meet at to start fleet operations.

[loyaltrekie]

Clearly they want a one "game world"(server) but not really. Honestly I would much have multiple servers and less instancing(CO over does the zone instancing garbage) then have multiple "shards" of the same area. Kinda half defeats the purpose of the whole one big server thing.

[rogerwroten]

I don't think his questions have been answered, and I am interested too. So I will ask them again.

"Will we be able to beam down to a planet on a mission and pass other Captains on the road who are doing other missions?" Or will we be alone, especially if we are solo?

"Will we be able to fly our ships through a system - coming across another captain in battle, and joining in to help him win the battle?"

"If I am on a planet and a high level captain runs by will I be able to ask him to help me kill off the Klingons, or whoever we are fighting?"

Anyone know how this is done in CO, or how it might me done in STO?

[thefrayl]

I don't think his questions have been answered, and I am interested too. So I will ask them again.

"Will we be able to beam down to a planet on a mission and pass other Captains on the road who are doing other missions?" Or will we be alone, especially if we are solo?

"Will we be able to fly our ships through a system - coming across another captain in battle, and joining in to help him win the battle?"

"If I am on a planet and a high level captain runs by will I be able to ask him to help me kill off the Klingons, or whoever we are fighting?"

Anyone know how this is done in CO, or how it might me done in STO?

No offense, but read the thread :p. Most of those questions have already been answered, atleast when basing off of what CO does. Yes, there are open areas where you play among many other players. There are also team-specific mission instances.

But as for flying your ship through a system, I've heard that we'll have to warp from planet to planet. I could be wrong but that sounds like each planet will have an instance > orbit and ground where available.

[rogerwroten]

No offense, but read the thread :p. Most of those questions have already been answered, atleast when basing off of what CO does. Yes, there are open areas where you play among many other players. There are also team-specific mission instances.

But as for flying your ship through a system, I've heard that we'll have to warp from planet to planet. I could be wrong but that sounds like each planet will have an instance > orbit and ground where available.

Maybe I am not reading correctly then. Where is the answer to "If I am on a mission, am I alone, or will others be there too? If I am on a mission, can I hail a passing Captain and ask for help? Will I be able to jump in and help someone fighting? Will I even know if someone is in the area if they are on a mission (quest)?

I know there are open areas... But from what I read they are non-mission areas. I am talking Mission areas (quest areas).

[Vaul]

Well since Craig seemed to indicate that Cryptic wanted to make a game where people feel like they are the captain of a starship, in the movies, rarely did you see a Captain show up and help another. Remember, space is vast and starfleet has ships all over exploring and making contact. In that spirit, I can understand the need to have episodes be solo ( instanced ). Although, perhaps if you are in an instance and send out a distress call, nearby ships or ships within a certain radius will get that information via their BOs and be able to head in to assist you. This way, those that do want help, have a chance to get it, and those that do not others taking their glory, will do it solo.

[loyaltrekie]

Well since Craig seemed to indicate that Cryptic wanted to make a game where people feel like they are the captain of a starship, in the movies, rarely did you see a Captain show up and help another.

Pretty sure he said he wanted to recreate the spirit of the shows; no duplicate the budget of the shows(which I'm 100% sure why we didn't see more "team work")

[The_Padre]

They've already answered this, when you're on an episode, unless you're teamed with other captain's, you won't be seeing anyone else. There are "public" places (Earth for example) where you will see other players.

[Commander_Nate]

I am beyond tired of hearing about this. Cryptic should just come out and explain it and how exploration, episodes, and the game map all tie together.

[blujester]

Ok.. I'll take a shot at this.


When flying at Warp you will be over the astrometric map and here you will see other ships/players.

When droping out of warp to sector space you will be in an instance alone or with team members if grouped up. No other players will be present but you can invite others as long as your team is not full. (inviteing has been confirmed but limets on how many can appear in your instanced sector is pure speculation. It is hinted at that you can call for additional help but whether that means beyond 5 in a sector or not is unknown)

On a planet the same rules would apply. What we can be fairly certain of is no one can join your instance unless invited.

The above applys to Episodes only. Certain persistant instances ie. DS9 etc. will be large social hubs and may or may not be sharded Co uses mini zones, CoH uses very large zones and only shards when population of the zone gets extremely high. The zones in CoH always feel crowded with heros. It is understandable in Co to have smaller zones so you feel more special. In STO I would assume they want the social zones to be epic.

Therefore, you will not pass a high ranking captain on a planet in a mission, although you could hail one and invite him.

You will be able to help a captain in need as long as he's in a persistant zone or you are invited to his instance.




Bj

[Loekii]

Depends on Caps for Population.. But you find in Star Fleet Command for 'instance' a big fleet population base in dynaverse servers as key to having the Spirit of Team work re-kindled.

CO was difficult to team up as the servers filled quickly and the Friends list bugs.. made for bad form of pestering them wit PMS to try and group of the tougher mish..

IF they can tighten that up in early ALpha going Closed.. it would really help the flow of testing.

I think this will be one aspect that STO may directly benefit from CO.

STO will have about 6 Months of CO retail performance patches and fixes to draw upon. I would assume that by the time STO is released, CO will have solved a couple of issues with Friends lists, passing on those fixes/discoveries to STO.

[rogerwroten]

Ok.. I'll take a shot at this.


When flying at Warp you will be over the astrometric map and here you will see other ships/players.

When droping out of warp to sector space you will be in an instance alone or with team members if grouped up. No other players will be present but you can invite others as long as your team is not full. (inviteing has been confirmed but limets on how many can appear in your instanced sector is pure speculation. It is hinted at that you can call for additional help but whether that means beyond 5 in a sector or not is unknown)

On a planet the same rules would apply. What we can be fairly certain of is no one can join your instance unless invited.

The above applys to Episodes only. Certain persistant instances ie. DS9 etc. will be large social hubs and may or may not be sharded Co uses mini zones, CoH uses very large zones and only shards when population of the zone gets extremely high. The zones in CoH always feel crowded with heros. It is understandable in Co to have smaller zones so you feel more special. In STO I would assume they want the social zones to be epic.

Therefore, you will not pass a high ranking captain on a planet in a mission, although you could hail one and invite him.

You will be able to help a captain in need as long as he's in a persistant zone or you are invited to his instance.




Bj

Thank You!

[Loekii]

Maybe I am not reading correctly then. Where is the answer to "If I am on a mission, am I alone, or will others be there too? If I am on a mission, can I hail a passing Captain and ask for help? Will I be able to jump in and help someone fighting? Will I even know if someone is in the area if they are on a mission (quest)?

I know there are open areas... But from what I read they are non-mission areas. I am talking Mission areas (quest areas).

The AskCryptic said that if you are in a 'private instance' (one just created for you), that you may invite others into it:

Yes, in some ways it will be similar. We actually have three levels of maps. There’s the sector space map, which you’ll be in when you’re going across the galaxy and traveling from one system to another. It’s not entirely flat, but also not completely 3D. There are dimensions to it. You’ll see sector grids, planets, solar systems, space stations, nebulas, anomalies and all sorts of different points of interest. You’ll see and interact with other players in sector space. You’ll also be doing a lot of your exploration in sector space. For example, you may be traveling across the galaxy when your com officer suddenly says, “Captain, there’s a distress call!” At that point, you get to follow up on that distress call, enter that system and engage in that mission.

That’s the second level of map. When you go into points of interest the game opens up a 3D space map (or system map) where you can engage in combat. Many of these will be instanced just for you. Some of them will be persistent so that you can go in and other people can join you. For example, there will be a persistent Klingon battlefront where the Klingons are fighting the Romulans. Something will always be going on there and anyone can join in. In instances you can go in alone or your team members can join you.

From system space (either persistent or instanced) you can transport to a ground map, like the surface of a planet or the inside of a space station.
Source: http://www.startrekonline.com/ask_cryptic/4-30-09

So in open (Persistent) Instance --- think of this more like Zones in WoW. There will be other players flying around, warping in and out. There will be stuff going on, just like a typical Zone in WoW. Craig seemed to make it sound like these areas are huge (vertically, you would not be able to visually see another players ship if you were each at separate edges, so I imagine they will tend to have other players about.

In 'Private' Instances, think of these more like WoW dungeons, where only you and your group can go. You can invite someone - if you have the room - but someone cannot simply 'wander in' (and you cannot simply wander into someone else's private instance).

Does that sort of explain it better?

[loyaltrekie]

So in open (Persistent) Instance --- think of this more like Zones in WoW. There will be other players flying around, warping in and out. There will be stuff going on, just like a typical Zone in WoW. Craig seemed to make it sound like these areas are huge (vertically, you would not be able to visually see another players ship if you were each at separate edges, so I imagine they will tend to have other players about.

[/COLOR]

There is a huge differnce in the WoW comparison though AFAIK WoW doesn't create another copy of a zone when it hits a certain number of players; which is a pretty big difference imho(which from what I understand all ST:O zones will have certain instances of them if they "fill up"[or is this incorrect])

[rogerwroten]

The AskCryptic said that if you are in a 'private instance' (one just created for you), that you may invite others into it:



So in open (Persistent) Instance --- think of this more like Zones in WoW. There will be other players flying around, warping in and out. There will be stuff going on, just like a typical Zone in WoW. Craig seemed to make it sound like these areas are huge (vertically, you would not be able to visually see another players ship if you were each at separate edges, so I imagine they will tend to have other players about.

In 'Private' Instances, think of these more like WoW dungeons, where only you and your group can go. You can invite someone - if you have the room - but someone cannot simply 'wander in' (and you cannot simply wander into someone else's private instance).

Does that sort of explain it better?



Yes Loekii, it does for the most part. What I am still a little confused about is this... Will there be missions (quests) in the persistent areas? In other words, can/will quests be done in persistent areas? Or always in instances, like DDO? When I do a mission will it always be me/my group and no one else?

[Loekii]

There is a huge differnce in the WoW comparison though AFAIK WoW doesn't create another copy of a zone when it hits a certain number of players; which is a pretty big difference imho(which from what I understand all ST:O zones will have certain instances of them if they "fill up"[or is this incorrect])

Correct, WoW doesn't create copies of the zones (ie does for their dungeons, and BGs though).

What I mean by it is like a typical zone, is that it is for all effects and purposes, like typical zone you find in WoW or EQ, in that there are other players running around the area killing mobs, doing quests, etc along side you.

In the CO beta, I turned off the 'allow me to select the zone' option, so zones loaded automatically for me (instead of presenting an instance list). From a gameplay feel, it basically feels like playing EQ, and traveling about via the Wizzy Spires or Druid rings, instead of running through a canyon to the zone 'wall'.

[Loekii]

Yes Loekii, it does for the most part. What I am still a little confused about is this... Will there be missions (quests) in the persistent areas? In other words, can/will quests be done in persistent areas? Or always in instances, like DDO? When I do a mission will it always be me/my group and no one else?

In CO, the missions and mission giving NPCs were all located in the same instance.

It worked just like going to the 'Barrens':

Quest Givers scattered about (Just like in the Crossroads)
NPC Vendors and Trainers in the area (just like at the Crossroads)
There were say 100 other players running about the instance doing various quests
Various roaming mobs (trash mobs as well)
content scattered across a large zone (barren size almost)
some places had 'portals' to 'dungeons' so to speak.


Really the only noticeable difference (you dont notice the copy instances) was how you entered and exited the area. Imagine the Barrens being blocked off from foot traffic (cannot pass from the other zones via foot), but rather you had to teleport there -- Sort of like how Druids had to Teleport to Moonshade or what ever the Druid Zone was in WoW.

Personally, I really like it. It helps make the areas feel populated, instead of ghost towns, but keeps population in Check, so you are not fight constantly fighting over spawns and content.

[jblancato]

Ahhhhh I see. I think I understand, that way we can all head to DS9 on day one, but be in (ahem) paralell universes and not grinding the server to halt. The kind of problems Eve did / does suffer from.

As someone above said, if you're in a fleet you can having a setting to find the same instance. Next problem is whether there is a cap on each instance (assume so), which could lead to half your fleet not getting in. - Or would a fleet be able to 'create' it's own instance for them selves?

You can also change instances on the fly. In Champs, it's an option on the minimap. You click it and have the option to move around if you want to meet a friend on a different version of the same map.

[Loekii]

You can also change instances on the fly. In Champs, it's an option on the minimap. You click it and have the option to move around if you want to meet a friend on a different version of the same map.

Is there or is there any iteration about a 'group summon' command/utility, that would pull all yoru group members to the Same instance upon command?

[Commander_Nate]

Ok.. I'll take a shot at this.


When flying at Warp you will be over the astrometric map and here you will see other ships/players.

When droping out of warp to sector space you will be in an instance alone or with team members if grouped up. No other players will be present but you can invite others as long as your team is not full. (inviteing has been confirmed but limets on how many can appear in your instanced sector is pure speculation. It is hinted at that you can call for additional help but whether that means beyond 5 in a sector or not is unknown)

On a planet the same rules would apply. What we can be fairly certain of is no one can join your instance unless invited.

The above applys to Episodes only. Certain persistant instances ie. DS9 etc. will be large social hubs and may or may not be sharded Co uses mini zones, CoH uses very large zones and only shards when population of the zone gets extremely high. The zones in CoH always feel crowded with heros. It is understandable in Co to have smaller zones so you feel more special. In STO I would assume they want the social zones to be epic.

Therefore, you will not pass a high ranking captain on a planet in a mission, although you could hail one and invite him.

You will be able to help a captain in need as long as he's in a persistant zone or you are invited to his instance.




Bj

But they haven't explained exploring or the map in general when you are not in an Episode. That's where much of this debate stems from.

[loyaltrekie]

You can also change instances on the fly. In Champs, it's an option on the minimap. You click it and have the option to move around if you want to meet a friend on a different version of the same map.

I hate to derail this thread; but I don't quite understand what the point is in doing such a heavily instanced world and then calling it the "same game world". I understand the benefits of 1 game world and think its a great idea; but the heavy instancing of every zone kinda breaks that 1 server immersion IMHO of course.

Is there or is there any iteration about a 'group summon' command/utility, that would pull all yoru group members to the Same instance upon command?

I'm not too heavy on the systems in place with CO, but seeing as how you are asking I'm sure they don't have any big "features" regarding zones (which seems weird with such a large amount of instancing). I personally would like it if it auto-put you into a zone that has more of your contacts(maybe even the ability to give contacts higher priority) rather then just putting you in the lowerst numbered one that has a slot(which I'm assuming is the current setting). I'm sure it will add a chuck of load to the server processing but just a thought.

[Loekii]

But they haven't explained exploring or the map in general when you are not in an Episode. That's where much of this debate stems from.

Did you try the CO Open Beta?

I think it gives a pretty good idea how it will work in STO, especially when combined with he recent Gameplay Videos:


Part 1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdM_7kt4_UM&feature=channel_page
Part 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjovV_2U9pM&feature=channel
Part 3:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76ND7Q0TrDI&feature=channel
Part 4:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64wxE-BvtXI&feature=channel


The videos show both zones and the Sector map, so you can get a better idea.

I hate to derail this thread; but I don't quite understand what the point is in doing such a heavily instanced world and then calling it the "same game world". I understand the benefits of 1 game world and think its a great idea; but the heavy instancing of every zone kinda breaks that 1 server immersion IMHO of course.


CO felt very much like an MMO to me. It did not feel like Guildwars, nor DDO, but rather if felt more like EQ and WoW.

[Dext]

instanced= kill the game

You an 20 of your fleet members would like to me up so you set a pace you all get there an only 4 of you are in the same place so you have to port every one in to the same zone an hope it is not full. This is not a MMO setup MMO's should be Open an Free Roaming NOT "instanced"

instanced is not what we would like. from what they told us is to even go to Earth to Mars we have to Warp there what is that all about. in the show they did not use Warp when in the Sol System due to hitting other ships plaints or other things it was just not a safe thing to do.

an even going Room to Room in a star base is instanced from what I seen. what is that about?

At this point in time I would like them to push back the game an get it the way the fans would like it.

HINT: NOT INSTANCED.


Info I got to show that it is all instanced (there is 4 parts to it): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7wnCqAJPVI

[Griffin]

The way I'm seeing this whole thing (I maybe wrong) is that the galaxy map will be open and persistant. Each point of interest will either be a private instance (as explained above) or a hub, which will function similar to CO (Numerous identical instances of the hub).

Now, if I am correct in my assumptions, the galaxy map will contain every player that isn't currently in an instance, which could mean any number really. It will only be in this galaxy view that the game will truely be 1 single, persistant server.

Once again, if this is true, then one begs the question... How will PvP territory in the Neutral zone be handled? Will they make each hotspot in the Neutral zone a hub? Will a planet in one hub change hands yet the same planet in another hub remain the same? Will the Neutral zone even be persistant similar to the main galaxy map?

A lot of questions and assumptions. I for one hope we get some answers soon.

[thefrayl]

I hate to derail this thread; but I don't quite understand what the point is in doing such a heavily instanced world and then calling it the "same game world". I understand the benefits of 1 game world and think its a great idea; but the heavy instancing of every zone kinda breaks that 1 server immersion IMHO of course.

I'm not sure if you have played a game that uses this mechanic before. I hadn't before the CO Open Beta and I shared your concerns with it. And while it does have some effect on global chat/social interaction, the ill effects are nowhere near as profound as you might expect.

Getting around these instances is an absolute breeze, and in no way have I ever felt like I wasn't playing a full scale MMO. The population is plentiful and lively in these instances, and it allows for the break down of "my friend plays on x server but I play on y server" boundaries. Everyone can talk to anyone in their friend's list, regardless of which Zone and instance they are playing on. And I had no problem meeting said friends like you would in any other MMO.

[Mozcol]

instanced= kill the game

You an 20 of your fleet members would like to me up so you set a pace you all get there an only 4 of you are in the same place so you have to port every one in to the same zone an hope it is not full. This is not a MMO setup MMO's should be Open an Free Roaming NOT "instanced"

instanced is not what we would like. from what they told us is to even go to Earth to Mars we have to Warp there what is that all about. in the show they did not use Warp when in the Sol System due to hitting other ships plaints or other things it was just not a safe thing to do.

an even going Room to Room in a star base is instanced from what I seen. what is that about?

At this point in time I would like them to push back the game an get it the way the fans would like it.

HINT: NOT INSTANCED.


Info I got to show that it is all instanced (there is 5 parts to it): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7wnCqAJPVI

Having only one server to hold all players is something I would not want to experience if it was not instanced. While the tech exists to make a game server practically lag free (ridiculous amounts of money to so do so though) you think the average comp could handle it? not a chance.:cool:

[DarkJedi007]

A good MMO shouldn't use too many instanced areas. I feel like the reason people justify paying the 15 or so a month is to support large servers that can handle hundreds or thousands of people in the same area so that space seems 'populated.' If everything is instanced areas would seem pretty dead and the great thing about MMO's, the social aspect, is gimped. I hope Cryptic decides against having instanced orbits or planets and instead has a singular shard like WoW or EVE. Instanced missions would make sense, but instanced areas where people are likely to congregate seems silly.

[Loekii]

I'm not sure if you have played a game that uses this mechanic before. I hadn't before the CO Open Beta and I shared your concerns with it. And while it does have some effect on global chat/social interaction, the ill effects are nowhere near as profound as you might expect.

Getting around these instances is an absolute breeze, and in no way have I ever felt like I wasn't playing a full scale MMO. The population is plentiful and lively in these instances, and it allows for the break down of "my friend plays on x server but I play on y server" boundaries. Everyone can talk to anyone in their friend's list, regardless of which Zone and instance they are playing on. And I had no problem meeting said friends like you would in any other MMO.

I agree.

I found the system to be much better than I had expected, and I definitely enjoyed the population controls. I am confident that if I were to play CO, I would almost never encounter a 'dead area', like I commonly do in other systems.

I think its a great system, and just needs some polishing to get the bugs out, and will end up working to everyones benefit for the most part.

The two big things on my list about it:

Better Chat Functions (would like to see chat options that open up channels to outside your instance)
Easier method to get groups into the same zone fast.

[LordDave]

I'd love to do a comparison study on how many people a WoW server holds and how many people per instance a CO shard holds.

[loyaltrekie]

I'm not sure if you have played a game that uses this mechanic before. I hadn't before the CO Open Beta and I shared your concerns with it. And while it does have some effect on global chat/social interaction, the ill effects are nowhere near as profound as you might expect.

Getting around these instances is an absolute breeze, and in no way have I ever felt like I wasn't playing a full scale MMO. The population is plentiful and lively in these instances, and it allows for the break down of "my friend plays on x server but I play on y server" boundaries. Everyone can talk to anyone in their friend's list, regardless of which Zone and instance they are playing on. And I had no problem meeting said friends like you would in any other MMO.

I wonder if one of the micro transaction purchases will allow us to have our own private instances all to ourself of each zone.{Note: it was a joke}

I'd love to do a comparison study on how many people a WoW server holds and how many people per instance a CO shard holds.

Since every one has different versions of "common" vocabulary when you are referring to CO shard are you refering to the hardware on the rack managing the data; or the zone instance?

[Loekii]

I'd love to do a comparison study on how many people a WoW server holds and how many people per instance a CO shard holds.

That would be interesting. Wasn't it capped at somewhere around 3k or 4k?

I would actually like to see how many a single zone can hold, before it lags out.

[Mozcol]

A good MMO shouldn't use too many instanced areas. I feel like the reason people justify paying the 15 or so a month is to support large servers that can handle hundreds or thousands of people in the same area so that space seems 'populated.' If everything is instanced areas would seem pretty dead and the great thing about MMO's, the social aspect, is gimped. I hope Cryptic decides against having instanced orbits or planets and instead has a singular shard like WoW or EVE. Instanced missions would make sense, but instanced areas where people are likely to congregate seems silly.

One server...one zone. No matter how supreme the server is your screen would look like a drunk trying to use a flip book. No thanks, give me instanced social zones like CO/eq2 or like Guild Wars.

[jblancato]

The way I'm seeing this whole thing (I maybe wrong) is that the galaxy map will be open and persistant. Each point of interest will either be a private instance (as explained above) or a hub, which will function similar to CO (Numerous identical instances of the hub).

Now, if I am correct in my assumptions, the galaxy map will contain every player that isn't currently in an instance, which could mean any number really. It will only be in this galaxy view that the game will truely be 1 single, persistant server.

I'm checking on this now, but from a technology standpoint, it wouldn't be feasible to have thousands of players on the galaxy map.

Really, the game works like I described it above. Different maps have different population limits, and you can move between different instances of the maps as you like to group up with other people as you desire.

[Loekii]

I'm checking on this now, but from a technology standpoint, it wouldn't be feasible to have thousands of players on the galaxy map.

Really, the game works like I described it above. Different maps have different population limits, and you can move between different instances of the maps as you like to group up with other people as you desire.

So will there be multiple copies 'Sector Map/Warp' instances as well, and then multiple instances for the 3d maps/Impusle?

[SelorKiith]

I'd love to do a comparison study on how many people a WoW server holds and how many people per instance a CO shard holds.

As Far as I know (and if I understand you correctly) WoW Servers run from 2000 up to 7000 people max. (at least this was my last information about it it's old and I cannot really remember it ^^)... of course scattered throughout the whole Gameworld...
From the Times I played and judged by the few Orgrimmar Raids we've done (Yeah I was an Alliance Dwarf Paladin :P)... European/German WoW Servers just breaks down with around 200 sometimes up to 300 people in the same Area...

[loyaltrekie]

I'm checking on this now, but from a technology standpoint, it wouldn't be feasible to have thousands of players on the galaxy map.

Since no images/video has been shown about the "galaxy map" I can't really make any comments about it. As for thousands of players in a given area; the only thing I can think of is Eve which is running on what is just upgraded 10 year old infrastructure to the best of my knowledge. I hate to play the Eve card but I think it fits in the situation since were talking about massive single server people in a given area. What trick does Eve use to manage that? Does it also have heavy instancing?

[Loekii]

Since no images/video has been shown about the "galaxy map" I can't really make any comments about it. As for thousands of players in a given area; the only thing I can think of is Eve which is running on what is just upgraded 10 year old infrastructure to the best of my knowledge. I hate to play the Eve card but I think it fits in the situation since were talking about massive single server people in a given area. What trick does Eve use to manage that? Does it also have heavy instancing?

Well we have seen video of the 'Sector Map' -- the view/map you see when traveling at Warp between planets and systems (at about 2:50 in):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64wxE-BvtXI


I certainly hope we have a 2d 'Galaxy' map as well -- ala WoW World map view (where you can zoom out from your immediate area, to a map of your 'sector view', to a full Alpha/Beta map.

[LordDrakonis]

i played CO and it was crazy to have 1000000000 of instances it was good for CO but for star trek???? thats not good thats very bad because this is one universe and we need server sections no instances ( we just need instances for dungeons and group quests/episodes)

[SelorKiith]

Since no images/video has been shown about the "galaxy map" I can't really make any comments about it. As for thousands of players in a given area; the only thing I can think of is Eve which is running on what is just upgraded 10 year old infrastructure to the best of my knowledge. I hate to play the Eve card but I think it fits in the situation since were talking about massive single server people in a given area. What trick does Eve use to manage that? Does it also have heavy instancing?

Well... even in Eve you don't have that much Players crammed together in one small space... The Game is still divided in certain Areas only reachable through the Warp Gates... so I assume that every area is on it's own shard and beeing able to handle a certain albeit small amount of players... I don't think that they can handle more then 200 maybe 300 Players... but I really cannot find any numbers on this... but the advantage is that then only this shard is gone and anyone else can still play.

[WikiUltimate]

It's dissapointing to hear that STO will be heavaly instanced... it's not game breaking, just disapointing.

There is so much "space" in space, there should be no need for instancing out side of major hub areas such as Sol, Qo'noS, DS9 or planitary missions.

[LordDrakonis]

It's dissapointing to hear that STO will be heavaly instanced... it's not game breaking, just disapointing.

There is so much "space" in space, there should be no need for instancing out side of major hub areas such as Sol, Qo'noS, DS9 or planitary missions.

yes thats what i mean! *SIGN*

[Exist-nl-]

Eve-online doesnt run on 1 server either it runs on multiple interconnect servers called nodes but I did read that they managed to hold a fleet battle with about 700 to 800 players in one area node and it was still playable.
They havent licensed their tech for nothing :)

But I more interested in what the max players is on one of the instances in STO.

[LordDave]

Since every one has different versions of "common" vocabulary when you are referring to CO shard are you refering to the hardware on the rack managing the data; or the zone instance?
A shard, as far as I know, is a copy of an area that is processed with different people.
ie. DS9 could have 10 shards. Each shard looks exactly the same, has the same missions, NPCs, ect.... but not the same players.

Since no images/video has been shown about the "galaxy map" I can't really make any comments about it. As for thousands of players in a given area; the only thing I can think of is Eve which is running on what is just upgraded 10 year old infrastructure to the best of my knowledge. I hate to play the Eve card but I think it fits in the situation since were talking about massive single server people in a given area. What trick does Eve use to manage that? Does it also have heavy instancing?

As Loekii said, there is some view of the galaxy map, which I like. Not sure why because it's a very "busy" map, but I like it.

While EVE doesn't use instances, they do have a system of sorts. Each "system" or area is separated by large tracks of empty space, which everyone just warps through.
And since everything is so spread out it's likely that the load per zone is low enough to not worry about lag.

[LordDrakonis]

A shard, as far as I know, is a copy of an area that is processed with different people.
ie. DS9 could have 10 shards. Each shard looks exactly the same, has the same missions, NPCs, ect.... but not the same players.



As Loekii said, there is some view of the galaxy map, which I like. Not sure why because it's a very "busy" map, but I like it.

While EVE doesn't use instances, they do have a system of sorts. Each "system" or area is separated by large tracks of empty space, which everyone just warps through.
And since everything is so spread out it's likely that the load per zone is low enough to not worry about lag.

i hope it will not be the same instancing system like CO pls take no oder an other instancing system :(

[Kinneas]

I went in with an open mind and really disliked CO and the instancing.

imo anytime a loading screen pops up it blows Immersion. Yes it is a game but the game does not need to remind you every other moment it is a game.

There is nothing 'massive' about a sharded system.

How can you have a good economy with a sharded system?

How does a fleet really help the UFP of KDF if every sector has multiple instances?

Anyway. We'll see I guess.

[Griffin]

I'm checking on this now, but from a technology standpoint, it wouldn't be feasible to have thousands of players on the galaxy map.

Really, the game works like I described it above. Different maps have different population limits, and you can move between different instances of the maps as you like to group up with other people as you desire.


If what you are stating here is true, then Cryptic is insulting us by calling this game a 'Persistant MMO', because it will be neither persistant nor a true MMO. Basically, by instancing every level of map in game, but in the form of a single server, similar to CO, there will not be a single ounce of persistant game mechanics available to us. Nothing player controlled or significant anyway. Wow, how can you insult us by calling some random NPC events 'persistant'... damn... All this talk about creating content based on player actions in game, having a 'single, persistant server'... would be complete and utter horseshit.

Why 'instance' the main galaxy map? Why? Why not make that map persistant and divide the game into seperate servers? At least that way our actions in game will actually affect what happens on that server, even if a small number of people experience those unique changes.

Kinda ****ed at this disappointing news, and I imagine many others are aswell.


But of course, if the galaxy map is infact unique, single and persistant... then all will be well.

[LordDrakonis]

I went in with an open mind and really disliked CO and the instancing.

imo anytime a loading screen pops up it blows Immersion. Yes it is a game but the game does not need to remind you every other moment it is a game.

There is nothing 'massive' about a sharded system.

How can you have a good economy with a sharded system?

How does a fleet really help the UFP of KDF if every sector has multiple instances?

Anyway. We'll see I guess.

oh really good opinion! really agree

[Commander_Nate]

Did you try the CO Open Beta?
Nope I haven't. I don't plan to either because I really don't have time between working all day, studying for the LSAT and so on. Besides that, I have pretty much no interest in playing a superhero MMO. That's just not my thing. My comp is also in need of some upgrades which I plan on getting before STO comes out.


I think it gives a pretty good idea how it will work in STO, especially when combined with he recent Gameplay Videos:


The videos show both zones and the Sector map, so you can get a better idea.
I've been meaning to watch these but I can't get youtube at work, which is typically when I'm on here. I don't really go on the STO boards much at home, but I'll try to remember.


CO felt very much like an MMO to me. It did not feel like Guildwars, nor DDO, but rather if felt more like EQ and WoW.

My concern is that Cryptic might be losing sight of the fact that they are making two completely different games in CO and STO. Sharing things like the graphics engine and so on is fine but they are fundamentally different game concepts.

Superheros are an inherintely soloish concept. A game or story about them should focus on them.

STO is a game where we will be simulating members of the military and government of two or more major galactic powers. This concept inherently requires being together and acting in concert with other players as much as possible. While I understand that instancing may be prudent in some aspects of a game like this, there comes a point where I feel it will harm rather than help the game.

[LordDave]

i hope it will not be the same instancing system like CO pls take no oder an other instancing system :(

Looks like it will be.

Even in social hubs, every ROOM will be instanced. Go figure on that.

[Esgar]

STO is a game where we will be simulating members of the military and government of two or more major galactic powers. This concept inherently requires being together and acting in concert with other players as much as possible. While I understand that instancing may be prudent in some aspects of a game like this, there comes a point where I feel it will harm rather than help the game.
I do agree with this to a point, but I think it'll depend on how large the caps are, and how they're planning to handle the neutral zone (I imagine it'll be it's own area, but things like faction balance there are hopefully being addressed, if this is the case). Large caps will make the game feel similar to WoW, for example (which isn't necesssarily a bad thing), but small caps could lead to the problems you mention.

[Commander_Nate]

I do agree with this to a point, but I think it'll depend on how large the caps are, and how they're planning to handle the neutral zone (I imagine it'll be it's own area, but things like faction balance there are hopefully being addressed, if this is the case). Large caps will make the game feel similar to WoW, for example (which isn't necesssarily a bad thing), but small caps could lead to the problems you mention.

I'd still rather have one, single game universe.

But if we are going to have instancing I agree that the caps need to be very high, I'm talking in the couple of hundreds of players in one instance/shard, not just a few dozen.

Furthermore the instances/shards should be on some sort of rolling system. Each area should have only one instance/shard open by default until it fills up, then another one opens when the need arises. Once the player population drops down enough, it goes back to 1 instance/shard only.

So if the population limit is 400 players, and there's only 300 in that location, there is only 1 instance/shard. If it jumps to 500, then a 2nd instance/shard opens. If it goes back below 400, it goes back to 1 instance/shard.

The NZ and other dynamic PvP areas should be as unified as possible or else they are kind of pointless.

[LordDrakonis]

I'd still rather have one, single game universe.

But if we are going to have instancing I agree that the caps need to be very high, I'm talking in the couple of hundreds of players in one instance/shard, not just a few dozen.

Furthermore the instances/shards should be on some sort of rolling system. Each area should have only one instance/shard open by default until it fills up, then another one opens when the need arises. Once the player population drops down enough, it goes back to 1 instance/shard only.

So if the population limit is 400 players, and there's only 300 in that location, there is only 1 instance/shard. If it jumps to 500, then a 2nd instance/shard opens. If it goes back below 400, it goes back to 1 instance/shard.

The NZ and other dynamic PvP areas should be as unified as possible or else they are kind of pointless.

oh thats a cool idea too

[Esgar]

But if we are going to have instancing I agree that the caps need to be very high, I'm talking in the couple of hundreds of players in one instance/shard, not just a few dozen.
I imagine it will be at least 100, though (depending on the area) I do hope we'll see more.



Furthermore the instances/shards should be on some sort of rolling system. Each area should have only one instance/shard open by default until it fills up, then another one opens when the need arises. Once the player population drops down enough, it goes back to 1 instance/shard only.

So if the population limit is 400 players, and there's only 300 in that location, there is only 1 instance/shard. If it jumps to 500, then a 2nd instance/shard opens. If it goes back below 400, it goes back to 1 instance/shard.

The NZ and other dynamic PvP areas should be as unified as possible or else they are kind of pointless.
I agree with you there.

[thefrayl]

But if we are going to have instancing I agree that the caps need to be very high, I'm talking in the couple of hundreds of players in one instance/shard, not just a few dozen.

Most zones in CO are 120+. Due to the very LARGE nature of space, I have a feeling we'll see higher caps in STO - but I could be wrong.

Furthermore the instances/shards should be on some sort of rolling system. Each area should have only one instance/shard open by default until it fills up, then another one opens when the need arises. Once the player population drops down enough, it goes back to 1 instance/shard only.

So if the population limit is 400 players, and there's only 300 in that location, there is only 1 instance/shard. If it jumps to 500, then a 2nd instance/shard opens. If it goes back below 400, it goes back to 1

I'm 90% sure that is how it indeed works. Which actually promotes social interaction among players in a big way. Under a traditional server configuration, one "Tank" could desperately be looking for a "Healer" on server "X" with no such luck. While a "Healer" could be in the very same zone of an instance, looking for "Tank" on server "Y". Unfortunately, because of this, they will never be able to contact each other and group up.

Dynamic instancing fixes that problem by consolodating and ensuring that whichever open zone you are in, it will be well populated.

[blujester]

Ok..some things to concider.

1: EVE is instanced heavlly and don't let any one tell you different. Every time you take a warp gate you are handed off and every time you take an acceleration gate you are handed off. The difference being anyone can join your instance at anytime and be your friend or your enemy which means kill stealing and griefing and any number of other things that people find aggravating.

2: For those who say STO should not feel like a lonely game and we should see starships every where all the time. Almost every single episode of every single series was about ONE StarFleet vessel and its crew. There are exceptions and it sounds like those exceptions will be in the game. But aside from Wolf 359 and some of the Dominion wars there was almost no massive gathering of starships in one place ever. Don't get me wrong..seeing the 7th fleet amassed to attack the Dominion was a high point for me ..just wow...omg....I love it.. But it's a rare thing in cannon and looks to be rare in the game. Thats both good and bad but ultimately a compromise between a full on persistant universe that lags to beat h3// or a very playable game with the "feel" of Star Trek.
To Quote D. Adams "Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind- bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space."

3: It should feel lonly..you and your ship... maybe you have a couple of friends along but other than that..nothing for as far as the eye can see. And then the Klingon raiding party decloaks and it's on like donkey kong baby!!


4: They have over 100 people in persistant zones in CO so we'll have that too I imagine. That will feel epic and you know it. But 1000 and laggy won't and you know it. The central trade hub on EVE is a nite mare slideshow on a lite day and quite simply a game crasher on a busy day. I was stuck there for a week once because it lagged and crashed so bad I couldn't even make it to a warp gate. Not fun.

5: the devs want to give us a StarTrek experience..and what they are proposing so far seems to be a good compromise imho. You and your crew against the galaxy. Your all alone out here captain so make your decisions count.. help could be a long ways away.


Bj

[Hornet331]

^
+1

Everyone is rambling about EVEs presistant world, but i doubt much of those wo ramble about it actually play eve. Most of the time your alone, most star systems have less the 10 pilots in them (including docked pilots). The onl time when you encounter hughe ammounts of ships is when theres a big corp war, 10 raid, or in the trade hubs and beginner regions.


Instancing wont be even noticed moste of the time, i doubt for most systems there will be even more then one instance at all.

For the tradehubs and beginer regions it would actually be a lot better to have more instance.

Just make it possible that you can switch freely between em, so that it is possible to stay with friends.

[WikiUltimate]

I'd still rather have one, single game universe.

[...]

The NZ and other dynamic PvP areas should be as unified as possible or else they are kind of pointless.

agreed, giving us the ability to have planers/species join us is completly pointless if in Instance one the planet belongs to the federation and in instance 2 it belongs to the Klingon Empire...

Ok..some things to concider.

1: EVE is instanced heavlly and don't let any one tell you different. Every time you take a warp gate you are handed off and every time you take an acceleration gate you are handed off. The difference being anyone can join your instance at anytime and be your friend or your enemy which means kill stealing and griefing and any number of other things that people find aggravating.

[...]
Bj

Don't confuse Instancing (having more then one copy of an area on the same server) with Zones.

By your logic, SWG was all instnacing when you went form Corellia to Tatooine, but it's not. They are two distinctly differnt places, differnt Zones. Now, if there were two copies of Tatooine on one server (like Bria aka. the "galaxie" ) then that would be instancing.

[DanSeale]

You can also change instances on the fly. In Champs, it's an option on the minimap. You click it and have the option to move around if you want to meet a friend on a different version of the same map.

okie .. you kinda got my attention on this one . Now I'm REALLY currious as to how this game will be played !
(in the best sense of the word) ...

interesting .... very interesting !

[Commander_Nate]

Ok..some things to concider.

1: EVE is instanced heavlly and don't let any one tell you different. Every time you take a warp gate you are handed off and every time you take an acceleration gate you are handed off. The difference being anyone can join your instance at anytime and be your friend or your enemy which means kill stealing and griefing and any number of other things that people find aggravating.
Ok, we're not disputing any of that.


2: For those who say STO should not feel like a lonely game and we should see starships every where all the time. Almost every single episode of every single series was about ONE StarFleet vessel and its crew. There are exceptions and it sounds like those exceptions will be in the game. But aside from Wolf 359 and some of the Dominion wars there was almost no massive gathering of starships in one place ever. Don't get me wrong..seeing the 7th fleet amassed to attack the Dominion was a high point for me ..just wow...omg....I love it.. But it's a rare thing in cannon and looks to be rare in the game. Thats both good and bad but ultimately a compromise between a full on persistant universe that lags to beat h3// or a very playable game with the "feel" of Star Trek.
To Quote D. Adams "Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind- bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space."
In the many other debates we've had of late on this topic, we've established that this was largely because of budget issues on the shows along with other TV production constraints. It is frequently mentioned in the shows that there are X number of other ships in the sector or system, especially if it is in anywhere populated or important. The movies, especially the more recent ones which are closer to the STO timeline, often show multiple ships interacting with each other. This is likely due to increased production funding for a movie as compared to a TV show.

Lets take the oceans, which are the closest thing to space we have on Earth. They are vast and it's easy to get lost and alone in one ship. But there are established shipping lanes and major ports of call that everyone uses. It is incredibly common to see other vessels at sea, especially when you get near major ports and shipping lanes or islands, unless you intentionally go out into some remote area of the ocean.

3: It should feel lonly..you and your ship... maybe you have a couple of friends along but other than that..nothing for as far as the eye can see. And then the Klingon raiding party decloaks and it's on like donkey kong baby!!
Again what I said above applies. Let's also look at the storyline that Cryptic is building for us. The Alpha Quadrant is on the brink of the biggest war since the Dominion War, possibly bigger. Add to that the Borg and possibly 8472. Add to that major conflicts and instability in two former superpower, the Romulan Empire and Cardassian Union. We have no idea yet what exactly is going on with the Gorn, Tholians, or Breen, but they aren't typically friendly.

The point is, there's a lot going on and the galaxy is a very unstable, dangerous place from what we know. There should be plenty of contact and things to do with other players unless you go out into the unknown on your own.

4: They have over 100 people in persistant zones in CO so we'll have that too I imagine. That will feel epic and you know it. But 1000 and laggy won't and you know it. The central trade hub on EVE is a nite mare slideshow on a lite day and quite simply a game crasher on a busy day. I was stuck there for a week once because it lagged and crashed so bad I couldn't even make it to a warp gate. Not fun.
That's fine, I see the reasoning there. But instances/shards should automatically adjust in number so that they feel populated like an MMO should.

I should never be able to go to Earth or DS9 and be alone or with like 5 other people because there's 10 instances open when only 1 or 2 are needed.

5: the devs want to give us a StarTrek experience..and what they are proposing so far seems to be a good compromise imho. You and your crew against the galaxy. Your all alone out here captain so make your decisions count.. help could be a long ways away.
In the reaches of unexplored space, I agree with you. If I'm in the heart of the Federation or somewhere near it's borders with the Klingon Empire, there should be other players around.

[blujester]

agreed, giving us the ability to have planers/species join us is completly pointless if in Instance one the planet belongs to the federation and in instance 2 it belongs to the Klingon Empire...



Don't confuse Instancing (having more then one copy of an area on the same server) with Zones.

By your logic, SWG was all instnacing when you went form Corellia to Tatooine, but it's not. They are two distinctly differnt places, differnt Zones. Now, if there were two copies of Tatooine on one server (like Bria aka. the "galaxie" ) then that would be instancing.



semantics, but you are correct as am I. A Zone "is" an instance. The EVE engine has over 5000 zones but none exist in data untill someone occupys it. It is not loaded onto the servers if it's empty of players. Where EVE falls short is the central hubs having no split or "instanced" zones to cut the lag. It seems smooth gameplay would supercede the need or desire to have everyone in one zone. But in EVE you have a slideshow at times because as good as there engine is, it can't take the strain. They do a remarkable job with the massive fleet battles but I've witnessed a 340 man taskforce engageing 400+ before and we lost 60 players or more from each side do to server drops alone. Not fun. And this was a small battle compared to some of BoB's earlier exploits. (I know..they're all gone now but they ruled half the galaxy at one point)

My points about the "feel" of this game still stand, I believe it should feel lonely but it should not be, and doesn't look like it will be, hard to get your friends together and party.


Bj

[rogerwroten]

That's fine, I see the reasoning there. But instances/shards should automatically adjust in number so that they feel populated like an MMO should.

This is not just for you Nate, just using your post to ask... :D

Instancing should be dynamic and automatic. OK, any ideas as to how this would work?

Simple example..
We have 5 instances of someplace. 100 per instance max. Actually 439 players. Now through players logging off and getting discoed, the number drops down to 398. Now how do you handle this. And say this is the breakdown of the instances. #1 has 100, #2 has 95, #3 has 85, #4 has 74 and #5 has 44. How do you switch players? Do you randomly pick players and move them to a different instance? Do you move fleet players together even if they are not grouped? Or maybe just wait till you can move the whole group from one instance to another?

Now another question. Is the max number per instance a hard number that you cannot go over? If so, what happens if you have 201 (making the max number per instance 100) players in an area does the one players get an instance all to himself till someone else logs on?

[WikiUltimate]

When i hear "instance" i see 1 zone with 2 or more copies if it running at once with differnt events happening in it at the same time. and considering the size of space, this should never happen except in "hub" areas.

from your explination, what EvE dose is brilliant, but i guess it's how you define Instancing, i don't see that as instancing.

If STO did something along those lines i doubt anyone would complain, but what it looks like they are doing is CO or COX "In Space" which is incredibly immersion breaking. ST is a look into our future, it's somewhat believeable, not a comic strip.

If my friend and i launched up in NASA shuttles and i was trying to find him, and he said he was orbeting the north pole, but i could not find him, who stupid would it sound if he said "oh sorry, i'm in earth instance 2..."

There is only 1 earth, 1 alpha centari, 1 Qo'noS... so there should only be 1 in game. Now i can understand the nessesity for some instnacing in HUB areas... but remember, when your docked at a Star Base, or beamed down to a planet, your ship dissapers... so it's not taking up "space" or CPUs...

i'm going to play Fallout 3 for a bit and cool down, i don't mean to come off hrash if i do.

[blujester]

Ok, we're not disputing any of that.


In the many other debates we've had of late on this topic, we've established that this was largely because of budget issues on the shows along with other TV production constraints. It is frequently mentioned in the shows that there are X number of other ships in the sector or system, especially if it is in anywhere populated or important. The movies, especially the more recent ones which are closer to the STO timeline, often show multiple ships interacting with each other. This is likely due to increased production funding for a movie as compared to a TV show.

Lets take the oceans, which are the closest thing to space we have on Earth. They are vast and it's easy to get lost and alone in one ship. But there are established shipping lanes and major ports of call that everyone uses. It is incredibly common to see other vessels at sea, especially when you get near major ports and shipping lanes or islands, unless you intentionally go out into some remote area of the ocean.

Again what I said above applies. Let's also look at the storyline that Cryptic is building for us. The Alpha Quadrant is on the brink of the biggest war since the Dominion War, possibly bigger. Add to that the Borg and possibly 8472. Add to that major conflicts and instability in two former superpower, the Romulan Empire and Cardassian Union. We have no idea yet what exactly is going on with the Gorn, Tholians, or Breen, but they aren't typically friendly.

The point is, there's a lot going on and the galaxy is a very unstable, dangerous place from what we know. There should be plenty of contact and things to do with other players unless you go out into the unknown on your own.

That's fine, I see the reasoning there. But instances/shards should automatically adjust in number so that they feel populated like an MMO should.

I should never be able to go to Earth or DS9 and be alone or with like 5 other people because there's 10 instances open when only 1 or 2 are needed.

In the reaches of unexplored space, I agree with you. If I'm in the heart of the Federation or somewhere near it's borders with the Klingon Empire, there should be other players around.

Ok..point 2 ..budget constraints aside it is the way we experienced trek for the most part aside from rare occasions that were special intirly because they were rare. As for the ocean you are correct to a point. You can set yourself on a major trade route and you will see ships at least once a week. But not much more than that. It's not a daily occurance by any means.

Point 3.. You are missing my point a little. There will be other ships around. You just can't see them as they are too far away. You can invite these other ships to join you and they will come (if willing) to your location/instance.

Point 4 .. Earth has a massive enclosed starbase for ship docking. You rarly see any ships flitting about that are not arriveing or departing. DS9 is almost never docked with more than a couple of Fed ships and other than battles there is never a bunch of ships hovering around. Just sayin.. you almost never see that. That doesn't mean that a ton of ships arn't on station just out of sight, but you don't "see" them. Get where I'm goin here? They will be there. You just won't always see them. But if you want to form a flight or whatever they call it of 5 buddys just hop on coms and invite away. They may have to push a button to join you but oh well, sacrifices have to be made.

Point 5..what I already said, space is big and your buddys will be there but you won't always see them from where you are. Does not mean you can't play with them. A busy zone with 100 starships flitting around will be cool, as I've said, but a laggy zone with 1000 starships won't be cool.


Bj

[Eldrael]

My first, and perhaps last, post here...really depends on the direction of the game, I suppose.

Anyway...I have lurked around these forums for a good while and was very intrigued by STO. A lot of the concepts I found interesting and I could see the potential for this to be a really great game, at least for someone like me. Yet as I read this thread, particularly the dev's response...I'll admit I'm greatly disappointed and saddened.

Currently I play a little mmo called Vanguard: Saga of Heroes, which has shaped up to be an awesome game. What I really, really love about it, though...is that it's set in a massive world with practically no instances or zones. (I say practically because I'm not completely certain if some of the raid zones have instances or not...someone else would have to confirm/deny that, and one could argue that the world's current setup relegates the continents to massive zones in-and-of themselves.) Anyone here who's played VG:SoH will tell you that, and it's a very amazing experience to be able to look at a mountain in the distance and just go there. Without a loading screen. Withough funneling from Point A to Point B. You can go anywhere you'd like on the game map and the world is persistently there, players and all.

The point of that little aside is that I've been spoiled and the bar has been set pretty high. I simply cannot stand the idea of instances/zones, especially when liberally introduced throughout a game world. In STO, I had imagined it might pursue a similar course, in that there would be a world that was huge and seamless and sprawling. After all, it's set in the galaxy. Now I'm getting the sense that we're going to have all these zones and much of the content will be instanced...and it's kind of painful especially when you see so much potential.

Granted, I'm sure a lot of people will disagree with me...there are probably quite a few who prefer instances/zones...but for someone like me, I just couldn't do it. So I hope there might be some clarification on just what they're talking about and aiming for with this game world. Sadly, I probably won't play the game if it has the instances/zones...I say sadly because the concept of a STO game is so appealing and I have been quietly looking forward to it for a while now...but of course I don't expect anyone to just change this game for me. ;p

In any case...just wanted to throw my 2 cents out there. Instances/zones...just funnel and separate players. They create a divide and are an impediment to immersion. I really wish more games would pursue what Vanguard did in the "massive, seamless world" regard. But oh well, I suppose...I still have VG...although I still would have enjoyed having my own ship and crew while fighting Klingons. :p I suppose I'll just have to wait and see where they take STO. The game might not end up being for me, but I'm sure it'll be a fine game in its own right. ^^

[Commander_Nate]

This is not just for you Nate, just using your post to ask... :D

Instancing should be dynamic and automatic. OK, any ideas as to how this would work?

Simple example..
We have 5 instances of someplace. 100 per instance max. Actually 439 players. Now through players logging off and getting discoed, the number drops down to 398. Now how do you handle this. And say this is the breakdown of the instances. #1 has 100, #2 has 95, #3 has 85, #4 has 74 and #5 has 44. How do you switch players? Do you randomly pick players and move them to a different instance? Do you move fleet players together even if they are not grouped? Or maybe just wait till you can move the whole group from one instance to another?

Now another question. Is the max number per instance a hard number that you cannot go over? If so, what happens if you have 201 (making the max number per instance 100) players in an area does the one players get an instance all to himself till someone else logs on?

Include a population floor as well as a population cap to be considered when launching a new instance.

[Commander_Nate]

My first, and perhaps last, post here...really depends on the direction of the game, I suppose.

Anyway...I have lurked around these forums for a good while and was very intrigued by STO. A lot of the concepts I found interesting and I could see the potential for this to be a really great game, at least for someone like me. Yet as I read this thread, particularly the dev's response...I'll admit I'm greatly disappointed and saddened.

Currently I play a little mmo called Vanguard: Saga of Heroes, which has shaped up to be an awesome game. What I really, really love about it, though...is that it's set in a massive world with practically no instances or zones. (I say practically because I'm not completely certain if some of the raid zones have instances or not...someone else would have to confirm/deny that, and one could argue that the world's current setup relegates the continents to massive zones in-and-of themselves.) Anyone here who's played VG:SoH will tell you that, and it's a very amazing experience to be able to look at a mountain in the distance and just go there. Without a loading screen. Withough funneling from Point A to Point B. You can go anywhere you'd like on the game map and the world is persistently there, players and all.

The point of that little aside is that I've been spoiled and the bar has been set pretty high. I simply cannot stand the idea of instances/zones, especially when liberally introduced throughout a game world. In STO, I had imagined it might pursue a similar course, in that there would be a world that was huge and seamless and sprawling. After all, it's set in the galaxy. Now I'm getting the sense that we're going to have all these zones and much of the content will be instanced...and it's kind of painful especially when you see so much potential.

Granted, I'm sure a lot of people will disagree with me...there are probably quite a few who prefer instances/zones...but for someone like me, I just couldn't do it. So I hope there might be some clarification on just what they're talking about and aiming for with this game world. Sadly, I probably won't play the game if it has the instances/zones...I say sadly because the concept of a STO game is so appealing and I have been quietly looking forward to it for a while now...but of course I don't expect anyone to just change this game for me. ;p

In any case...just wanted to throw my 2 cents out there. Instances/zones...just funnel and separate players. They create a divide and are an impediment to immersion. I really wish more games would pursue what Vanguard did in the "massive, seamless world" regard. But oh well, I suppose...I still have VG...although I still would have enjoyed having my own ship and crew while fighting Klingons. :p I suppose I'll just have to wait and see where they take STO. The game might not end up being for me, but I'm sure it'll be a fine game in its own right. ^^

Lurking around for a while? According to your profile you've been here just as long as me, which is about 3 months...but I guess that could be considered "a while". I certainly feel like I spend a lot of time here and make my presence felt. :D

That aside, I agree with the general sentiment of what you're saying. WWII Online was my deepest MMO experience. You could physically travel to every city, town, road, bridge, forest, river, tree, and bush on the map and anyone else you saw running/driving/flying around was another player or a Dev. I'm really hoping STO has at least some of these elements. If instancing is going to be included, they need to get it right.

[blujester]

My first, and perhaps last, post here...really depends on the direction of the game, I suppose.

Anyway...I have lurked around these forums for a good while and was very intrigued by STO. A lot of the concepts I found interesting and I could see the potential for this to be a really great game, at least for someone like me. Yet as I read this thread, particularly the dev's response...I'll admit I'm greatly disappointed and saddened.

Currently I play a little mmo called Vanguard: Saga of Heroes, which has shaped up to be an awesome game. What I really, really love about it, though...is that it's set in a massive world with practically no instances or zones. (I say practically because I'm not completely certain if some of the raid zones have instances or not...someone else would have to confirm/deny that, and one could argue that the world's current setup relegates the continents to massive zones in-and-of themselves.) Anyone here who's played VG:SoH will tell you that, and it's a very amazing experience to be able to look at a mountain in the distance and just go there. Without a loading screen. Withough funneling from Point A to Point B. You can go anywhere you'd like on the game map and the world is persistently there, players and all.

The point of that little aside is that I've been spoiled and the bar has been set pretty high. I simply cannot stand the idea of instances/zones, especially when liberally introduced throughout a game world. In STO, I had imagined it might pursue a similar course, in that there would be a world that was huge and seamless and sprawling. After all, it's set in the galaxy. Now I'm getting the sense that we're going to have all these zones and much of the content will be instanced...and it's kind of painful especially when you see so much potential.

Granted, I'm sure a lot of people will disagree with me...there are probably quite a few who prefer instances/zones...but for someone like me, I just couldn't do it. So I hope there might be some clarification on just what they're talking about and aiming for with this game world. Sadly, I probably won't play the game if it has the instances/zones...I say sadly because the concept of a STO game is so appealing and I have been quietly looking forward to it for a while now...but of course I don't expect anyone to just change this game for me. ;p

In any case...just wanted to throw my 2 cents out there. Instances/zones...just funnel and separate players. They create a divide and are an impediment to immersion. I really wish more games would pursue what Vanguard did in the "massive, seamless world" regard. But oh well, I suppose...I still have VG...although I still would have enjoyed having my own ship and crew while fighting Klingons. :p I suppose I'll just have to wait and see where they take STO. The game might not end up being for me, but I'm sure it'll be a fine game in its own right. ^^

I understand your concern my friend I really do..And Commander Nates as well. But what I want to stress here is that you will be surronded by a lot of players both in your "Zone" and in other versions of it. I seriously doubt DS9 or earth will ever feel lonely. But if it does a more populated and still lag free instance is just a button click away. You will never be isolated from your friends nor will you be excluded from making new ones. Nor will you be forced to play in a laggy spammy inviroment if you should choose to do otherwise. It's win win in many ways.

I think the concern here is mostly from those who've never played a game with multiple zone clones and don't understand how seemless and worrie free it can be. This is just my opinion of course, but I'd urge you to try it before you make your decision.


Bj

[Eldrael]

Lurking around for a while? According to your profile you've been here just as long as me, which is about 3 months...but I guess that could be considered "a while". I certainly feel like I spend a lot of time here and make my presence felt. :D

That aside, I agree with the general sentiment of what you're saying. WWII Online was my deepest MMO experience. You could physically travel to every city, town, road, bridge, forest, river, tree, and bush on the map and anyone else you saw running/driving/flying around was another player or a Dev. I'm really hoping STO has at least some of these elements. If instancing is going to be included, they need to get it right.

lol, well...I did lurk here for a longer while before finally signing up. :p

But yeah...if they do instancing it would have to be done right...but as for zoning...I don't really want to think about that. It would probably be too much for me, heh. ^^

I'll just wait and see what they're going to do with it.

(Guess I made it to a second post :D)

I understand your concern my friend I really do..And Commander Nates as well. But what I want to stress here is that you will be surronded by a lot of players both in your "Zone" and in other versions of it. I seriously doubt DS9 or earth will ever feel lonely. But if it does a more populated and still lag free instance is just a button click away. You will never be isolated from your friends nor will you be excluded from making new ones. Nor will you be forced to play in a laggy spammy inviroment if you should choose to do otherwise. It's win win in many ways.

I think the concern here is mostly from those who've never played a game with multiple zone clones and don't understand how seemless and worrie free it can be. This is just my opinion of course, but I'd urge you to try it before you make your decision.


Bj

My first mmo was EQ2. At the time, I was perfectly content with all the zones and instances. Then Vanguard came along and it ruined me, I tell you, ruined me. It was like I had been playing in a little crib inside a closed-up room for my entire life, and then someone came along and took me, opened the door to the outside, then tossed me out there. I absolutely love experiencing the "wild outdoors" of mmos. :D But a large, seamless world never translates, necessarily, into an empty one...it's just "more." I don't know...like I said, there are those who prefer and appreciate zones and instances...I just can't consider myself one of them anymore. ^^

But yes, I will definitely keep an eye on STO...at least so that I can see where it's going.

[dryzabone]

I like the "shard" system. It works.
The one thing that is absolutely better then a bunch of separated servers is that you never have to worry about rolling on a dead server.
Also, what is pretty sweet is that during offpeak times (in CO at least) you find that grouping, instanced pvp etc is much more enjoyable as all people come to the populated shards.
Its good, at first i thought it would be like Guild Wars, but it is nothing like that at all.

[Commander_Nate]

I understand your concern my friend I really do..And Commander Nates as well. But what I want to stress here is that you will be surronded by a lot of players both in your "Zone" and in other versions of it. I seriously doubt DS9 or earth will ever feel lonely. But if it does a more populated and still lag free instance is just a button click away. You will never be isolated from your friends nor will you be excluded from making new ones. Nor will you be forced to play in a laggy spammy inviroment if you should choose to do otherwise. It's win win in many ways.

I think the concern here is mostly from those who've never played a game with multiple zone clones and don't understand how seemless and worrie free it can be. This is just my opinion of course, but I'd urge you to try it before you make your decision.


Bj

I'm going to try STO out, I've been waiting too long for a good, new Trek game to come out not to. I'm just worried about how long I keep playing based on how this system ends up actually working.

[SnuffleKitty]

The shards work.

You will never have to ask that dreaded question, "Which server do you play on?". I've played quite a bit of WoW, on and off, over the years. I have never met anyone who has played on the same server as me. It's really frustrating. Your options are three-fold.


Re-roll
Paid Transfer
Do nothing


But you'll never have to deal with that in STO. "Oh hey, you play STO?" "Why yes I do!" "Fabulous!"

*High-five Cryptic*

-Snuffles

[dryzabone]

I'm going to try STO out, I've been waiting too long for a good, new Trek game to come out not to. I'm just worried about how long I keep playing based on how this system ends up actually working.
I wish i had made more Screenshots while i had the chance, but it's really ok. You wont feel lonely at all.
http://i30.tinypic.com/2l1g28.jpg

http://i25.tinypic.com/33kakae.jpg

http://i31.tinypic.com/wum2ki.jpg

http://i25.tinypic.com/144cnb9.jpg

[Loekii]

[/COLOR]
Nope I haven't. I don't plan to either because I really don't have time between working all day, studying for the LSAT and so on. Besides that, I have pretty much no interest in playing a superhero MMO. That's just not my thing. My comp is also in need of some upgrades which I plan on getting before STO comes out.


I've been meaning to watch these but I can't get youtube at work, which is typically when I'm on here. I don't really go on the STO boards much at home, but I'll try to remember.



My concern is that Cryptic might be losing sight of the fact that they are making two completely different games in CO and STO. Sharing things like the graphics engine and so on is fine but they are fundamentally different game concepts.

Superheros are an inherintely soloish concept. A game or story about them should focus on them.

STO is a game where we will be simulating members of the military and government of two or more major galactic powers. This concept inherently requires being together and acting in concert with other players as much as possible. While I understand that instancing may be prudent in some aspects of a game like this, there comes a point where I feel it will harm rather than help the game.

You said you did not participate in the CO Beta, so you don't have that experience, and you said you have yet to watch the videos of the STO gameplay.

Please do not take this the wrong way, as I am not meaning to be insulting, but I honestly think you making your decisions about the system without seeing the facts.

For example, the graphics between STO and CO are very different, and are not 'shared'. CO has a Comic Book style, and StO has a more sharper drawn look to it (which is intentional as that is the artistic style they want to for STO, over a completely photo realistic style).

After watching the videos and seeing how CO is set up, you can see they are two rather different games, both graphically, and gameplay wise.

Also, many of the things you are saying that 'should' be involved with instancing, bascially already are. I really think that once you get yourself up to speed, you will be more comfortable with the system.

[Loekii]

I wish i had made more Screenshots while i had the chance, but it's really ok. You wont feel lonely at all.
http://i30.tinypic.com/2l1g28.jpg

http://i25.tinypic.com/33kakae.jpg

http://i31.tinypic.com/wum2ki.jpg

http://i25.tinypic.com/144cnb9.jpg

And to add to this, these areas are pretty large (like zone size), not small 'rooms'.

[dryzabone]

And to add to this, these areas are pretty large (like zone size), not small 'rooms'.

yep, and note that i am in Australia and these were taken during offpeak times.

[rogerwroten]

Include a population floor as well as a population cap to be considered when launching a new instance.

And how would that work? I take it you are talking about a minimum number of player in each instance. Sooo, 100 players max and say 25 min. What happens if one instance drops below the minimum number? Pull someone from another instance to get it above the min number? The how do you choose who get transferred?

[blujester]

I'm going to try STO out, I've been waiting too long for a good, new Trek game to come out not to. I'm just worried about how long I keep playing based on how this system ends up actually working.



I hear ya brother. I was on the old forum from the first developer to tackle this and for 4 years got nothin but vaporware. I'm so stoked to play this game and so happy Cryptic is building it because I know from experience they build good games. They will give us a real Star Trek experience if anyone can. Of that I'm sure. There will be compromises to make the game work, but I trust the devs at cryptic to do it right. Not everyone will like their solution to every problem, myself included. But they will do what is right and cool within the engine they have.

And no I'm not a fanboi or a PR person (in case anyone was wondering) but I know how Emert thinks and he's got his teeth in this deep. It will be cool at least and Epic at best.




Bj

[blujester]

And how would that work? I take it you are talking about a minimum number of player in each instance. Sooo, 100 players max and say 25 min. What happens if one instance drops below the minimum number? Pull someone from another instance to get it above the min number? The how do you choose who get transferred?

yeah..he's not thinking it through. No one wants to get forced out of an instance in the middle of a convo or heaven forbid, battle because the floor was reached in your shard. The shards will stay up untill everyone is out of it. Thats the way the engine works, and for good reason. And thats why you'll very seldom not to be able to get into Shard one even if there's twenty shards.. some will leave the shard and you get to see a crowd just like you want. I've never been denied entry to Atlas Park one on CoH even if there is 3 versions running. So there you go.

Bj

[Kriss]

Since no images/video has been shown about the "galaxy map" I can't really make any comments about it. As for thousands of players in a given area; the only thing I can think of is Eve which is running on what is just upgraded 10 year old infrastructure to the best of my knowledge. I hate to play the Eve card but I think it fits in the situation since were talking about massive single server people in a given area. What trick does Eve use to manage that? Does it also have heavy instancing?

These are cuts from Dev blogs from the EVE universe. It will tell you how things work there. And give you a lot of insight as to why people like me HATE instancing which there is NONE of in EVE.

1 x EVE Server Cluster

The EVE Cluster is broken into 3 distinct layers, and a bit of the terminology that is thrown around from time to time (including later in this blog) can be explained quite simply here.

* Proxy Blades- These are the public facing segment of the EVE Cluster - they are responsible for taking player connections and establishing player communication within the rest of the cluster.
* SOL Blades - These are the workhorses of Tranquility and are the primary focus of our ongoing work. The cluster is divided across 90 - 100 SOL blades which run 2 nodes each.
o Node - a single EVE server process. This is the lowest level of granularity within the cluster.
o Dedicated SOL blade - These are SOL blades that we dedicate to one system only. Systems such as Jita, Motsu and Saila reside on these. They run two nodes like any other SOL blade, however the second node is idle and does not load any solar systems.
* Database Cluster - This is the persistence layer of EVE Online. The running nodes interact heavily with the Database, and of course pretty much everything to do with the game lives here. Thanks to our RamSans, our database is able to keep up with the enormous I/O load that Tranquility generates.
o At peak hours, our database is processing over 2,000 transactions per second, which generates around 38,000 IOPS (input output operations per second)
o To keep up with this load, we currently have two RamSans.

1 x SOL Blade

The EVE Server application itself (also known as a node) is primarily a CPU intensive process. Due to the nature of the Stackless Python programming methodology chosen for EVE Online, the python component of each node is a single thread, which means it can only ever utilize 1 CPU core at a time.

Our SOLs are IBM blades, and up until quite recently were almost all running AMD Opteron 2.8Ghz Dual Core processors with 4GB of DDR1 Ram. Over the last 6 months or so, we have been investigating options for replacing these Opteron processors with something more powerful. We selected some dual socket, dual core Intel Xeon 3.0Ghz Woodcrest blades for testing purposes, and have been using them as an integral part of our StacklessIO testing (as blogged about here by CCP Explorer). Now that StacklessIO has been released we are able to use these blades to their fullest, and as a first step looked at ways we could use these test blades on Tranquility.

1 x Rapid Deployment

When we hit 1400 players in Jita and then had the unfortunate incident where the SOL blade powering Jita ran out of memory, we looked to our Intel test blades for help. We shuffled some RAM around and were able to get 5 new Intel SOL blades with 16Gb of DDR2 Ram each ready for use. We did a staggered test deployment of these to Tranquility last week. On Friday, confident of their stability and anticipating performance increases, we set them up as dedicated SOL blades. That evening, Jita, Saila and Motsu were performing better than ever, and there was much rejoicing. Over the last weekend, the GM's did not receive a single "Stuck Character" petition from Jita!

A Brand new RamSan!

First and foremost - we are making preparations to ensure that our database server will be able to keep up with this ever increasing number of users. As the true heart of Tranquility, any lag felt at the database level reflects across the entire universe, and it is highly important that we keep our database completely lag free.

For the hardware geeks out there, the EVE database runs on a Microsoft SQL Server 2005 Active/Standby cluster. It has two identical database servers, with the database stored over two RamSan 400s and a DS4800 fiber channel array.

Our database servers themselves are more than capable of handling the levels of load we generate at present, with CPU usage quite acceptable, however we have noticed that our fiber channel disk array is starting to get pushed to a bit more load than we would like. This is not causing any visible issues just yet, but if left alone it will start to slow us down a bit - it's time to look to the future.

So we bought a 2TB RamSan 500 :-)

The new RamSan has been online for around a week now, running a few minor database tables while we ensure that everything is humming along smoothly (which it is) and making friends with our two existing RamSans. On Wednesday (18th Feb), we will be moving ALL data currently on our fiber channel drives over to this new RamSan, meaning the entire EVE database will be run from solid-state storage! Awesome!

That's nice, but I don't know what that technobabble was all about, what does it mean for the average player?

Having much faster storage means that we will see a number of improvements in the future:

* Shorter daily downtimes
* Shorter expansion deployments
* Maintaining virtually nonexistent database lag

And why do we need a whole 6 hours downtime to plug this thing in?

It actually doesn't take very long at all to plug the new RamSan in - that was done offline a week or so back. The reason we need to take Tranquility and associated websites down is that we have to take the EVE database offline to move its files around.

Moving the data files from our fiber channel disks to the RamSan is a fairly simple "copy->paste" operation, however due to the sheer amount of data being moved (1.1 TB), it will take us around 4 - 5 hours just to copy! Add in an hour or so of buffer and testing, and you have a 6 hour downtime.



Yummy, I like new stuff - so whatever happened to those super IBM blade thingamajigs you were all excited about last year?

It has been a pretty busy few months for us in Virtual World Operations, to say the least. There was a dev blog last year outlining some new super-powered blades that we had ordered. Well, to say the least, we have not stopped in our war on lag! The 6 x 3.3ghz Intel Wolfdale powered blades mentioned in that blog arrived soon after, performing very nicely indeed (a fact the regular 1000+ players in Jita would probably attest to). They performed so well, in fact, that we ordered a few more as a bit of a Christmas present...

Just prior to Christmas, we took delivery of two brand new bladecentres packed full of 28 of these 3.3Ghz, 16GB RAM monster blades! I and CCP Claw were on site in London to welcome them. Over one hardcore weekend of Windows installer madness we put these 28 new servers straight into service, retiring 56 of our old AMD blades in the process.

In total, we now have 34 of these ultra powerful blades in the cluster - 26 running as SOL blades, and 8 running as Proxy blades. That gives us a total of 104 out of 208 nodes running on brand new hardware! That's right, half of Tranquility is running on shiny new top of the line hardware as of Christmas ;)

But it doesn't stop there...

We have all sorts of things on the horizon that focus on our continued efforts attacking lag, latency and server side performance from all angles.

Our network engineers are busily finalizing the plans on some Cisco 7606-S routers which will be placed as the primary routing points within our game server network, and they are also revising our Internet peering strategy to expose Tranquility to our customers in the least number of hops around the globe. Lower ping times mean faster pew pew!

We have still more juicy hardware about to be delivered to us! This time, we are going to be among the first in the world to try out Intel's new "Nehalem" based Xeon processors. We have a test blade en-route to Tranquility and will be benchmarking that against the performance gains we have had from our Wolfdales.

There is a glimpse at life on the EVE server. This setup they have is so powerful it is almost considered a supercomputer and is the most powerful setup used in a commercial gaming setting.

Please note that since they have upgraded nearly all their hardware to top of the line stuff, some of it no one else uses in the RL yet, lag has been reduced to very small levels. There have also been fleet battles of over 1000 players with frame-rates of 30fps. ** This of course will vary with each setup the players use.

So to be quite honest, Cryptic has no excuse to instance every damn thing in their game. You instance what you absolutely HAVE to and everything else can be very persistent.

[thefrayl]

These are cuts from Dev blogs from the EVE universe. It will tell you how things work there. And give you a lot of insight as to why people like me HATE instancing which there is NONE of in EVE.

There is a glimpse at life on the EVE server. This setup they have is so powerful it is almost considered a supercomputer and is the most powerful setup used in a commercial gaming setting.

Thats great, now all they have to do is make a game that's actually fun to play. :p

[Kriss]

Thats great, now all they have to do is make a game that's actually fun to play. :p

Well my friend, fun is like beauty. It is in the eye of the beholder. And judging by the Sub-rate for EVE, its a lot more fun than a whole lot of games out there :D

[LordDrakonis]

Well my friend, fun is like beauty. It is in the eye of the beholder. And judging by the Sub-rate for EVE, its a lot more fun than a whole lot of games out there :D

i dont think that you can put STO VS EVE on one top.

EVE is tooo freee i think , there is to much and STo have to get a balance thrpough a MMO like Lord of the Rings online or WoW to Eve Online i think:cool:

[Veglargh]

To me it doesn't make sense to have multiple "instance" zones because this takes away from the Massive Multiplayer aspect of the game. Specially when there are games out there that allow or have the capability to support massive amount of players in one area.

[LordDrakonis]

To me it doesn't make sense to have multiple "instance" zones because this takes away from the Massive Multiplayer aspect of the game. Specially when there are games out there that allow or have the capability to support massive amount of players in one area.

cool thing, yeaa the MMO fealing goes away with instancing ! Tahts the DEAL:D

[slingbladez]

Instead of having multiple servers with only one instance of each zone they will have one server with many instances of each zone. I'm just hoping the population limit on each instance is high enough.

[LordDrakonis]

Instead of having multiple servers with only one instance of each zone they will have one server with many instances of each zone. I'm just hoping the population limit on each instance is high enough.

yea i hope. proble is CO and i think STO are build on the on server system, you can copy it to more servery sestems but cryptic build it on one system and thats why thy woukd not change that but what they can change are the instanzes ... more bigger inszanes from area and people and more support for languages instead of chatting with other people and so on.

[LordDrakonis]

dual post please deleate thx

[slingbladez]

I think some people are forgetting that while a lot of MMORPG's only have one instance of each zone they are essentially instanced because they have more than one server. The difference is that you can't change serves with your existing character so if you want to play with someone on a different server you have to create a new character in that server(some allow you to pay for it, but you can't seamlessly change between each at will).

If Cryptic manages to create high enough population limits then their system will be superior to others because you won't have to worry about what server you choose when starting out. You will be able to change instance and have the potential of playing with every single person in the game instead of only those on your server like in other games. You won't be stuck with a limited player base playing against the same people over and over again.

In Warhammer Online i got stuck on a server that was underpopulated and i had to wait for the devs to let us transfer to higher population servers (the pvp was pretty population dependent). I would have killed to be able to change servers/instances at will and play with all those high population servers. The pvp was pretty stagnant also because you were playing against the same players over and over again. Even though the game had about 20-30x the players i wasn't able to play against any of them because they were on a different server.

[Exist-nl-]

To me it doesn't make sense to have multiple "instance" zones because this takes away from the Massive Multiplayer aspect of the game. Specially when there are games out there that allow or have the capability to support massive amount of players in one area.


Can you name any game ?
And don't say EVE online they allow about 800 players in 1 area which usually results in crashes, heavy lag and a lockdown of the area. But that almost never happens and most of the other areas are underpopulated except in JITA (main hub which still has a cap) or with fleet battles which are too huge to be fun anyway. So that's far from ideal.

An other options would be to have the STO universe to be split up in a couple of main servers So a server for federation area and 1 for the Klingon area and 1 for the neutral zone. But instancing would still be a better options then that :)

[Loekii]

To me it doesn't make sense to have multiple "instance" zones because this takes away from the Massive Multiplayer aspect of the game. Specially when there are games out there that allow or have the capability to support massive amount of players in one area.

Actually, the instancing supports the Multiple Player better than the old server system, by regulating and focusing the Population.

Alot of separate server MMOs have had to Merge servers, because their population was too low -- basically zones were ghost towns with not many - if any - players in them.

With the single server instancing system, the population is channeled and balanced, so each zone is populated(full) of players -- making for a much more 'Multi-player' experience.

Sticking with you friends is simply a matter of just going to the instance they are in.

The added bonus of the instancing system, is that it caps the population, to prevent lagging and content issues (20 people all going after the same single mob), thus further providing a better experience for most people.

Instead of having multiple servers with only one instance of each zone they will have one server with many instances of each zone. I'm just hoping the population limit on each instance is high enough.

CO seemed to have pretty large populations once you got out of the starter zones -- which were intentionally capped at a lower population, imo, for Content Experience -- capping the population so that people were not standing on top of each other waiting for spawns.

Back in May/June, iirc, Cryptic was having 200 person fleet battles in STO, which suggests that their target cap for zones is basically +200, when not capped by Content parameters.

[Zepath]

I just don't agree with your premise Loekii ...

Shards make finding your friends more difficult ...

Shards cap population, so if something cool is going on in a given shard, you're likely to get locked out of it.

Shards do not stop any camping ... because they don't even fire up unless there is the population to warrant it. If it takes 200 people to cause a new shard to be spawned, 190 people could be camping that boss ... there isn't going to be a new shard to go to.

I can't count how many time I've stood around just waiting for everyone to decide on a shard, and then actually get into it, because there's some guy who just can't read, and always goes to the wrong shard, or the grouping is too big to get us all into that shard by the time we try to get there.

And to stop shard hopping (to avoid being attacked from NPC's or PCs) they make you go to a shard gate, and spawn in the new shard at the gate ... so there's more time wasted when trying to get a group together.

You have constant immersion-breaking loading screens.

You have people shouting, "Incoming!" or "Can I get a rezz" or, or ... which is always followed by 50 people asking what shard they are in.

Shards are a cheap and lazy way for the for a company to design a game. Its tantamount to them saying, "This game doesn't matter enough to us, to create the content to spread out the population or load-balance the servers to avoid instancing." IMO

[DanSeale]

I just don't agree with your premise Loekii ...

Shards make finding your friends more difficult ...

Shards cap population, so if something cool is going on in a given shard, you're likely to get locked out of it.

Shards do not stop any camping ... because they don't even fire up unless there is the population to warrant it. If it takes 200 people to cause a new shard to be spawned, 190 people could be camping that boss ... there isn't going to be a new shard to go to.

I can't count how many time I've stood around just waiting for everyone to decide on a shard, and then actually get into it, because there's some guy who just can't read, and always goes to the wrong shard, or the grouping is too big to get us all into that shard by the time we try to get there.

And to stop shard hopping (to avoid being attacked from NPC's or PCs) they make you go to a shard gate, and spawn in the new shard at the gate ... so there's more time wasted when trying to get a group together.

You have constant immersion-breaking loading screens.

You have people shouting, "Incoming!" or "Can I get a rezz" or, or ... which is always followed by 50 people asking what shard they are in.

Shards are a cheap and lazy way for the for a company to design a game. Its tantamount to them saying, "This game doesn't matter enough to us, to create the content to spread out the population or load-balance the servers to avoid instancing." IMO

I got to be honest with all of ya here ...

I REALLY wish I knew more about this subject ! I'd feel a lot better !

[Exist-nl-]

I just don't agree with your premise Loekii ...

Shards make finding your friends more difficult ...
you can group
Shards cap population, so if something cool is going on in a given shard, you're likely to get locked out of it.
even on a persistent 1 server solution there are still going to be population caps
Shards do not stop any camping ... because they don't even fire up unless there is the population to warrant it. If it takes 200 people to cause a new shard to be spawned, 190 people could be camping that boss ... there isn't going to be a new shard to go to.
Same with a persistent server/world

I can't count how many time I've stood around just waiting for everyone to decide on a shard, and then actually get into it, because there's some guy who just can't read, and always goes to the wrong shard, or the grouping is too big to get us all into that shard by the time we try to get there.
How does someone's lack of common sense translate into sharding/instancing being bad ?
And to stop shard hopping (to avoid being attacked from NPC's or PCs) they make you go to a shard gate, and spawn in the new shard at the gate ... so there's more time wasted when trying to get a group together.
Easily solved by restricting this while being attacked for example

You have constant immersion-breaking loading screens.
lag would even be more immersion-breaking in worst case an area get locked when the cap limit is reached on a persistant universe solution

You have people shouting, "Incoming!" or "Can I get a rezz" or, or ... which is always followed by 50 people asking what shard they are in.
Dont allow to see the chat from other people in other shards/instances

Shards are a cheap and lazy way for the for a company to design a game. Its tantamount to them saying, "This game doesn't matter enough to us, to create the content to spread out the population or load-balance the servers to avoid instancing." IMO

That is just a simple lazy excuse of you not liking instancing there is more to it then just a DEV saying "Lets just have everything on 1 server without instancing".

[USS_Parallax]

The technology to have everything on one server without instancing does not exist.

Well, it's not affordable. I'm sure they could do it if they had unlimited resources.

[andrewprofit]

this duplicate instancing reminds me of a tv show what was it oh yeah it was white castles.

[andrewprofit]

The technology to have everything on one server without instancing does not exist.

Well, it's not affordable. I'm sure they could do it if they had unlimited resources.

Is it a bandwidth bottleneck or a processor bottleneck?

[Zepath]

That is just a simple lazy excuse of you not liking instancing there is more to it then just a DEV saying "Lets just have everything on 1 server without instancing".

No its not. But yes, I've stated already I hate it.

But let's take your points ...

YOU CAN GROUP .... I didn't say you can't group, I said it makes finding your friends more difficult. I should have said, its makes running into your friends far less likely.

EVEN ON A PERSISTENT 1 SERVER SOLUTION ... I've not been arguing for a persistent 1 server solution. I've been agruing against instancing vs. multiple servers.

SAME WITH A PERSISTENT WORLD ... thank you, that was my point ... shards don't solve the problem.

HOW DOES SOMEONE'S LACK OF COMMON SENSE ... I'm not judging the individual, I'm stating an issue that all of us have experienced, that instancing just exacerbates.

EASILY SOLVED BY RESTRICTING THIS WHILE BEING ATTACKED ... my example was brevity. There are other examples of exploiting it that causes them to create spawn points ... for example, following a group so they clear the way, then hopping zones so you have access to the content you were supposed to have to fight your way to. There's other examples.

LAG WOULD BE EVEN MORE IMERSION-BREAKING ... its just naive to think that instancing is going to stop lag. Just go read the CO forums, talk to the people that played CoX. Wait ... I played CoX, they still had lag. I played AoC, they still had lag.

DON'T ALLOW TO SEE THE CHAT FROM OTHER PEOPLE IN OTHER SHARDS/INSTANCES ... I see, so now I should limit my 'community connection' to compensate for their game design I already don't like?

[Prof.Komodo]

I'm checking on this now, but from a technology standpoint, it wouldn't be feasible to have thousands of players on the galaxy map.

Really, the game works like I described it above. Different maps have different population limits, and you can move between different instances of the maps as you like to group up with other people as you desire.

so your telling me STO will be set up just like Champions? i realy hope not seeing as everyone i know and a good amount of people on the boards have canceled there orders of champions based on the fact you have instance maps

[Kriss]

The technology to have everything on one server without instancing does not exist.

Well, it's not affordable. I'm sure they could do it if they had unlimited resources.

If they cannot get it into one world then they put up other servers. Not take the LAZY and frankly, CHEAPEST route they can.

At least on different server, just like LOTR you can instance stuff that actually needs to be instanced. IE parts of their so-called episodes( book chapters in LOTR). Every chapter of the books is not instance nor is every damn quest(mission). The whole server is PERSISTENT... given the few exceptions for person quests.

What Cryptic is doing here completely breaks any immersion they "claim" they are going to have. And once again, its just fricking cheap and lazy!

[Veglargh]

Can you name any game ?
And don't say EVE online they allow about 800 players in 1 area which usually results in crashes, heavy lag and a lockdown of the area. But that almost never happens and most of the other areas are underpopulated except in JITA (main hub which still has a cap) or with fleet battles which are too huge to be fun anyway. So that's far from ideal.

An other options would be to have the STO universe to be split up in a couple of main servers So a server for federation area and 1 for the Klingon area and 1 for the neutral zone. But instancing would still be a better options then that :)

I am not an expert in other games so I wouldn't be able to say that I can name a game were it allows over 800 people to play. The game that I have heard from other people that allow a large number of players (not sure what the highest might be) at once might be Planetside (and I would also say EVE). I think many are comparing EVE because they have a 1 server were the population has a higher potential of "capping" a zone unlike multiple server games. I done some city Raiding in WoW and that was pretty laggy so I can see were that point comes from.

I actually like the 1 server for each faction idea. But again, I'm not a IT expert so I wouldn't be sure how that could work.



Sticking with you friends is simply a matter of just going to the instance they are in.

The added bonus of the instancing system, is that it caps the population, to prevent lagging and content issues (20 people all going after the same single mob), thus further providing a better experience for most people.


Back in May/June, iirc, Cryptic was having 200 person fleet battles in STO, which suggests that their target cap for zones is basically +200, when not capped by Content parameters. [/INDENT][/COLOR]


If you just stick with friends while playing the game how are you going to meet new people? Many of the in-game friends that I made were by crossing each others path in a quest and helping each other. Again, that goes with the whole MMO experience. One would think that the server technology to lessen lagg would be improved as time goes on (Im not a IT expert so i just theorizing). In WAR they had a great public instance system that allowed everyone a fair chance at getting a nice loot drop from a boss and it was extremely easy to form groups. This is a space game not another fantasy MMO with dungeons. Unless we have Public space instances and "dungeon" style ground instances.



However, this capping system might give the Klingons an advantage since the Federation out number us their numbers wouldn't mean anything if they can only have the same amount of people in one "instance" as we do.

[Loekii]

so your telling me STO will be set up just like Champions? i realy hope not seeing as everyone i know and a good amount of people on the boards have canceled there orders of champions based on the fact you have instance maps

Yet they sold out of the CO LT subscriptions.

Obviously, while it does not appeal to you and your friends, it appeals to others. In fact, for some, the instancing system is one of the reasons they are purchasing the product.

[Zepath]

Yet they sold out of the CO LT subscriptions.

Obviously, while it does not appeal to you and your friends, it appeals to others. In fact, for some, the instancing system is one of the reasons they are purchasing the product.

They sold out again with the second offering they just put up? Amazing.

[Loekii]

If you just stick with friends while playing the game how are you going to meet new people? Many of the in-game friends that I made were by crossing each others path in a quest and helping each other. Again, that goes with the whole MMO experience.

Having played CO - and having encountered many players crossing my path in a quest, and having helped each other - I do not see what limitation you are seeing.

[Kriss]

Yet they sold out of the CO LT subscriptions.

Obviously, while it does not appeal to you and your friends, it appeals to others. In fact, for some, the instancing system is one of the reasons they are purchasing the product.

The game isn't even out of beta and nothing has been 'sold' yet. And I would seriously doubt that "instancing" would be the high-point for anyone buying a game. As for subs...hell, i'd be wiling to bet half those 6-month subs were just people from here trying to get a STO beta key. Which won't help their little game any.

[Commander_Nate]

You said you did not participate in the CO Beta, so you don't have that experience, and you said you have yet to watch the videos of the STO gameplay.

Please do not take this the wrong way, as I am not meaning to be insulting, but I honestly think you making your decisions about the system without seeing the facts.

For example, the graphics between STO and CO are very different, and are not 'shared'. CO has a Comic Book style, and StO has a more sharper drawn look to it (which is intentional as that is the artistic style they want to for STO, over a completely photo realistic style).

After watching the videos and seeing how CO is set up, you can see they are two rather different games, both graphically, and gameplay wise.

Also, many of the things you are saying that 'should' be involved with instancing, bascially already are. I really think that once you get yourself up to speed, you will be more comfortable with the system.

You're right to some extent but I shouldn't have to play another game that I have zero interest in to get a feel for a completely different one even if it's made by the same company.

My point about the graphics was that the engine is the same for the two games, not that the particular style was the same.

You might also be right about me winding up being comfortable with the system after STO comes out and we all get to try it. We'll have to wait and see.

Based on my previous MMO experience and Cryptics inital promises about STO compared to what they have recently revealed, there have to be some concerns here. This whole issue does run the risk of killing immersion and the community, and it raises some serious problems with Factional PvP.

The concerns that myself and others here have won't be put to rest until Cryptic either comes out with a detailed explanation of this and how it interacts with the rest of the game, or we get to play it and see how it works for ourselves.

[Loekii]

The game isn't even out of beta and nothing has been 'sold' yet. And I would seriously doubt that "instancing" would be the high-point for anyone buying a game. As for subs...hell, i'd be wiling to bet half those 6-month subs were just people from here trying to get a STO beta key. Which won't help their little game any.

I am not sure if you are simply misinformed, or intentionally trying to spread misinformation.

The CO Lifetime Subscriptions did indeed SELL OUT. There are pages upon pages of posts about it - both on this forum and the CO forum- , so I am not sure how you can claim it did not. In fact, there was such an outcry for more, that they Extended the Offer because MORE people wanted to purchase them.

[Zepath]

I am not sure if you are simply misinformed, or intentionally trying to spread misinformation.

The CO Lifetime Subscriptions did indeed SELL OUT. There are pages upon pages of posts about it - both on this forum and the CO forum- , so I am not sure how you can claim it did not. In fact, there was such an outcry for more, that they Extended the Offer because MORE people wanted to purchase them.


Again ... they just put up a new offering of LT subs for CO (a second round if you will) ... are you saying they are sold out on those as well?

[Loekii]

Based on my previous MMO experience and Cryptics inital promises about STO compared to what they have recently revealed, there have to be some concerns here. This whole issue does run the risk of killing immersion and the community, and it raises some serious problems with Factional PvP.


What 'promises' are you referring to?

[Loekii]

Again ... they just put up a new offering of LT subs for CO (a second round if you will) ... are you saying they are sold out on those as well?

The First batch.

[Kriss]

I am not sure if you are simply misinformed, or intentionally trying to spread misinformation.

The CO Lifetime Subscriptions did indeed SELL OUT. There are pages upon pages of posts about it - both on this forum and the CO forum- , so I am not sure how you can claim it did not. In fact, there was such an outcry for more, that they Extended the Offer because MORE people wanted to purchase them.


Do you know WHY they sold out? And I wasn't talking about subs... I was referring to the game itself. My comment for the subs is directed as to WHY they are sold out. I'd be willing to bet that a good handful or more of those LT subs won't even be used. People just want the STO perks. Why the hell else would they bundle all that stuff from a BIG NAME with another game that NO ONE knows anything about if they weren't desperate.

[Piotrek]

Going to repost something that i used in a previous thread, this just got skipped casue other info was being said. Figured it would add something to this thread on immerison.

"Honestly this whole time we been talking about this, i forgot to mention the most important reason why i hate instanced enviornments. For a game that has faction warefare and supposed to have PVP it takes away the whole reason to have strategic locations to hold and defend. If one system is really valuable and holding it is very important to the war, it becomes useless when there are 20 instances of it and they change hands constantly. Again it takes away from the epicness of combat and immerison of the game.

Man the more i think about this sharding thing, the more saddened i get by the developers lazy choice. They need to make this game more like SFC1,2,3/EVE/Freelancer and less like it is now."

[Kinjiru]

The game isn't even out of beta and nothing has been 'sold' yet. And I would seriously doubt that "instancing" would be the high-point for anyone buying a game. As for subs...hell, i'd be wiling to bet half those 6-month subs were just people from here trying to get a STO beta key. Which won't help their little game any.

The instancing isn't necessarily the feature that will drive people to play, but is IS a feature that will allow those of us playing to enjoy the game without suffering from the population lag so prevalent in games like SWG and EvE.

If you're determined to dislike the game, that's up to you, but I found it engaging, fun and immersive, the instances didn't detract from it at all.

As to popularity, from the success of CoH/CoV, it is evident there is definitely a market for the genre. Just look at the number of Comics produced, the number of readers that keep buying them throughout their lives. Not just children and teens, but adults well into and beyond middle age. The overriding factor is that super heroes and super powers are things that many people find intriguing, from the 1930s through to today.

CO allows the player to become part of the phenomena, and with some skill, some good writing and a little luck, is what we fans of STO are hoping to see here as well.

[Loekii]

Do you know WHY they sold out? And I wasn't talking about subs... I was referring to the game itself. My comment for the subs is directed as to WHY they are sold out. I'd be willing to bet that a good handful or more of those LT subs won't even be used. People just want the STO perks. Why the hell else would they bundle all that stuff from a BIG NAME with another game that NO ONE knows anything about if they weren't desperate.

So your argument is that people that are outraged about the Instancing system in CO, and know that STO is instanced based, will waste $60+, to get into beta for a game that is using a system they despise?

I would say that is pretty extreme.

The Majority seems to be okay with it -- be it they like it, they dont care or they are open to seeing how it works.

Given that many people tried the CO beta, and the lack of waves upon waves of individual posts expressing outrage, you claim that the 'majority' is outraged or against this system, is baseless and inaccurate.

[Commander_Nate]

What 'promises' are you referring to?

The promise of persistent, dynamic PvP between factions for one. As I've illustrated previously, instancing potentially creates some very serious problems in this regard.

Secondly, the promise to "pick a direction and just go", which can be rephrased as the ability to go wherever and see whatever I want. If locations have to be "shared" at player discretion, that ability is seriously impeded.

Not to mention the immersion and community issues being brought up. We've all been round and around about these issues for many days now.

It's great to take things from CO that might help STO out but they should be fundamentally different games in every way including how the map and game universe is set up. In the end we should come out with a completely unique experience.

I feel it needs to be said, Captain Picard =/= Captain Planet.

[Loekii]

The promise of persistent, dynamic PvP between factions for one. As I've illustrated previously, instancing potentially creates some very serious problems in this regard.

Secondly, the promise to "pick a direction and just go", which can be rephrased as the ability to go wherever and see whatever I want. If locations have to be "shared" at player discretion, that ability is seriously impeded.

Not to mention the immersion and community issues being brought up. We've all been round and around about these issues for many days now.

It's great to take things from CO that might help STO out but they should be fundamentally different games in every way including how the map and game universe is set up. In the end we should come out with a completely unique experience.

I feel it needs to be said, Captain Picard =/= Captain Planet.

I think your interpretation of what they have said, and what they intended are not the same.

Imo, a PvPer, I have not seen them break any of those promises, and I have never seen them really definate them to the extent that they risk being broken.

I still see PvP being 'persistent' and 'dynamic', with instancing. I just have long since given up on expecting any game to create an amazing PvP system. The way I see it, if WAR -- An actual FvF game -- failed to get it right, I certainly do not see a PvE game like STO getting it any better. Infact, iirc, WAR's City Sieges uses instancing.

As for as the 'point and go', you can still do that. You jump to warp, an you just pick directions in the Sector View map and 'go'.

[Piotrek]

The promise of persistent, dynamic PvP between factions for one. As I've illustrated previously, instancing potentially creates some very serious problems in this regard.

Secondly, the promise to "pick a direction and just go", which can be rephrased as the ability to go wherever and see whatever I want. If locations have to be "shared" at player discretion, that ability is seriously impeded.

Not to mention the immersion and community issues being brought up. We've all been round and around about these issues for many days now.

It's great to take things from CO that might help STO out but they should be fundamentally different games in every way including how the map and game universe is set up. In the end we should come out with a completely unique experience.

I feel it needs to be said, Captain Picard =/= Captain Planet.

Thank you finally someone acknolwedges the whole problem with factional and pvp combat and the whole instance system, thats what my post a few posts up was all about. You cant have a factional warefare game in space and make locations star system and battle grounds instances. If thats what happens then its pointless to attack/defend areas cause there are 20 instances of them running at a time. So who cares if Earth 1 is attackes by borg Earth 2 is fine. Or klingon attack fleet is coming to take out the shipyards at a location to hamper star fleet production, who cares cause you got another 19 instances of the planet just fine. Ruins the whole feel of combat and controlling territory.

[Falin]

Thank you finally someone acknolwedges the whole problem with factional and pvp combat and the whole instance system, thats what my post a few posts up was all about. You cant have a factional warefare game in space and make locations star system and battle grounds instances. If thats what happens then its pointless to attack/defend areas cause there are 20 instances of them running at a time. So who cares if Earth 1 is attackes by borg Earth 2 is fine. Or klingon attack fleet is coming to take out the shipyards at a location to hamper star fleet production, who cares cause you got another 19 instances of the planet just fine. Ruins the whole feel of combat and controlling territory.

what you're saying in a nutshell is "IT RUINS IMMERSION AND DOES NOT FEEL LIKE STAR TREK!" sounds more like galaxy quest onlin than star trek online.

[Piotrek]

what you're saying in a nutshell is "IT RUIN IMMERSION AND DOES NOT FEEL LIKE STAR TREK!" sounds more like galaxy quest onlin than star trek online.

No what im saying is there will be no point of combat cause it adds no value to either the federation or the klingon empire. So besides pvping just to kill another person it does not add anything to this whole fed vs klingon war. One of the main focuses of this game besides exploration was on the focus on combat between the feds/klingons and if you have instanced battlefields territory never changes hands on the global map, attacks on installations and supply lines mean nothing, overall its just attacking to attack with no real meaning. If combat between the two faction was never a focus then why arnt we all lovely lovely in this timeline.

[JoJimGregory]

I have less problem with a point to point travel system, than I do with the fact (until a Dev states otherwise) that we'll be slaved to traveling across an arcade-style map when we warp. I hate it with a passion, and I'm repeating myself from my very first post on these boards several months back.

For those that do or have played WoW, and statistically speaking that's probably quite a few of us, when we travel by griffin or hypogriffin do we only see a world map from a look down view with a little icon representing our bird? No, we travel through the world and in the world, and not above and beyond and out of the world.

Cryptic, instead of allowing us to use the astrometrics view as a map to reference and plan where we want to go, is forcing us to use it, and stay in it, to get there. It is an unfortunate fact that developers, being humans, often fall into the trap that might best be represented by the following statement ...
"We spent a lot of time and money developing this travel map and you WILL stay in it and you WILL use it to travel and you WILL enjoy it!" They could have let us just pick a destination, the arrival areas of which should always be safe, and then given us a faux warp bubble view while we travel (or at least the option for it) in order to allow us to "fool ourselves" into believing we are in the galaxy. Instead, they are forcing us to use an arcade travel mode, and in my not so humble opinion, no matter how much artwork they throw into it, as an onscreen travel medium in an MMO it's going to destroy our ability to suspend disbelief that would have otherwise allowed us to feel like we are in an expansive galaxy. It furthermore removes the mystery and suspense of traveling through a dark tunnel strewn with hydrogen atoms to unknown destinations of potential adventure and danger, and instead lays the galaxy out for us as a smorgasbord of known quantities and known destinations, like a sandwich board at a Vegas casino.

This alone, far more than a plethora of loading screens and a zillion instances, will prove to be the single biggest immersion killer in STO.

[Loekii]

I have less problem with a point to point travel system, than I do with the fact (until a Dev states otherwise) that we'll be slaved to traveling across an arcade-style map when we warp. I hate it with a passion, and I'm repeating myself from my very first post on these boards several months back.

For those that do or have played WoW, and statistically speaking that's probably quite a few of us, when we travel by griffin or hypogriffin do we only see a world map from a look down view with a little icon representing our bird? No, we travel through the world and in the world, and not above and beyond and out of the world.

Cryptic, instead of allowing us to use the astrometrics view as a map to reference and plan where we want to go, is forcing us to use it, and stay in it, to get there. It is an unfortunate fact that developers, being humans, often fall into the trap that might best be represented by the following statement ...
"We spent a lot of time and money developing this travel map and you WILL stay in it and you WILL use it to travel and you WILL enjoy it!" They could have let us just pick a destination, the arrival areas of which should always be safe, and then given us a faux warp bubble view while we travel (or at least the option for it) in order to allow us to "fool ourselves" into believing we are in the galaxy. Instead, they are forcing us to use an arcade travel mode, and in my not so humble opinion, no matter how much artwork they throw into it, as an onscreen travel medium in an MMO it's going to destroy our ability to suspend disbelief that would have otherwise allowed us to feel like we are in an expansive galaxy. It furthermore removes the mystery and suspense of traveling through a dark tunnel strewn with hydrogen atoms to unknown destinations of potential adventure and danger, and instead lays the galaxy out for us as a smorgasbord of known quantities and known destinations, like a sandwich board at a Vega casino.

This alone, far more than a plethora of loading screens, will prove to be the single biggest immersion killer in STO.

On this point I agree.

I would like the option to click back down to a 3D Warp View, while traveling at warp.

I am also hoping we can turn on/off alot of the elements of the sector map. I don't care to stare at the grid, nor the 'blue ribbons', if I know where I am going and don't need to reference those things.

[Manta2015]

One thing I'm not looking forward to ~

Friend: "Hey man, you HAVE to get to Shard 31 on the Rigel Sector, it's out of control!"

You: "Oh? what's going on?"

Friend: "The CRAZIEST thing you'll ever see! You're right here, just jump right in!"

*Shard 31 is currently full*
You: "Ah crap, Shard 31 is full..."

Friend: "Omg just keep trying! Wow you're missing it!!"

*Shard 31 is currently full*
You: "What the heck is happening?"

Friend: "Hahahah oh MAN you gotta see this!"

You: "Dude, the que line is like 10 minutes... "

Friend: "Man you just missed out on the most epic thing I've ever seen playing STO...."

You: *shrug*


-Manta-

[Loekii]

One thing I'm not looking forward to ~

Friend: "Hey man, you HAVE to get to Shard 31 on the Rigel Sector, it's out of control!"

You: "Oh? what's going on?"

Friend: "The CRAZIEST thing you'll ever see! You're right here, just jump right in!"

*Shard 31 is currently full*
You: "Ah crap, Shard 31 is full..."

Friend: "Omg just keep trying! Wow you're missing it!!"

*Shard 31 is currently full*
You: "What the heck is happening?"

Friend: "Hahahah oh MAN you gotta see this!"

You: "Dude, the que line is like 10 minutes... "

Friend: "Man you just missed out on the most epic thing I've ever seen playing STO...."

You: *shrug*


-Manta-

Same thing happens on normal multiple servers that are full. By the time you clear the queue to log in, the event has passed.

[blujester]

No what im saying is there will be no point of combat cause it adds no value to either the federation or the klingon empire. So besides pvping just to kill another person it does not add anything to this whole fed vs klingon war. One of the main focuses of this game besides exploration was on the focus on combat between the feds/klingons and if you have instanced battlefields territory never changes hands on the global map, attacks on installations and supply lines mean nothing, overall its just attacking to attack with no real meaning. If combat between the two faction was never a focus then why arnt we all lovely lovely in this timeline.



Going through the dev chats I have gleened that "The nuetral zone will be static ie. the border won't change. the areas near the zone will shift allegance based on player actions both PVE and PVP. And Flight groups will be limeted to a mere 20 ships per side. So no EVE like goonswarms and no klingon takeing over the fed or vice versa."

As to an erlier post on here about the Borg attacking earth one but not earth 2 ,I am certain that if the borg attack a hub they will attack every single instance of that hub.


The only time an event will occur in one shard and not another is if that event is soly player driven. If the devs code an attack on any zone it will attack all versions of that zone simultainiously. No missing out on anything.

Bj

[Commander_Nate]

I think your interpretation of what they have said, and what they intended are not the same.
Possibly, but they have said that PvP territory changes will be in the game. Getting this to function properly and in a manner that is acceptable and worthwhile to players using an instanced system is a complicated issue to say the least.

You and I have discussed this in depth and while I accept the performance issues that exist, I do not see how having multiple instances of the same battle for the same planet as a fair way to do this.

I have suggested the alternative of having each planet, station, or other major location be it's own single instance weighted according to it's size and importance to the solar system. This way you can instance a battle for a solar system, yet still have the feeling of 1 battle, and you don't end up leaving players feeling screwed because they won their instance but still lost the planet they were fighting over. Something along these lines is the only way I can see PvP players being happy with instances and territory changes.


I still see PvP being 'persistent' and 'dynamic', with instancing. I just have long since given up on expecting any game to create an amazing PvP system. The way I see it, if WAR -- An actual FvF game -- failed to get it right, I certainly do not see a PvE game like STO getting it any better. Infact, iirc, WAR's City Sieges uses instancing.
WWII Online did an amazing job with it's PvP system. It was a 100% persistent FvF game too. So, there's precedent for it being done.


As for as the 'point and go', you can still do that. You jump to warp, an you just pick directions in the Sector View map and 'go'.

Right, but if my map is going to be different than everyone elses because we all have to "share" what we find for others to see it, what's the point?

[Loekii]

Right, but if my map is going to be different than everyone elses because we all have to "share" what we find for others to see it, what's the point?

Your map wont be that different -- if it is different at all.

PvP is not goign to change the map of the game on any large scale. At most, it will affect a few planets in the NZ, while content in Fed, Klingon, and Romulan space will basically be static PvE content maps.

And again, WAR, a FvF game, uses instancing in its City Siege process, iirc, so instancing is a tool that is being used in PVP/FvF -- which demonstrates that STO can do it as well.

[Commander_Nate]

Your map wont be that different -- if it is different at all.
I hope you're right. I guess we'll find out when the first person in STO goes "OMGZ I FOUND A NEW SOLAR SYSTEM!!!!!111!!1!" by whether or not we can all see it and go to it. :D

PvP is not goign to change the map of the game on any large scale. At most, it will affect a few planets in the NZ, while content in Fed, Klingon, and Romulan space will basically be static PvE content maps.
The Neutral Zone is a rather large area. Territory changes in it won't be major on a galactic scale but should be significant in a regional and local sense.


And again, WAR, a FvF game, uses instancing in its City Siege process, iirc, so instancing is a tool that is being used in PVP/FvF -- which demonstrates that STO can do it as well.



Again, I hope you're right and that they will do it well. There is a large possibility of error here however, and this is what has us concerned. More info would be helpful.

BTW, could you PM me the links to those youtube videos of the map and so on? Hopefully tonight or this weekend I'll have some time to sit down and watch them.

[Piotrek]

[/COLOR]
Possibly, but they have said that PvP territory changes will be in the game. Getting this to function properly and in a manner that is acceptable and worthwhile to players using an instanced system is a complicated issue to say the least.

You and I have discussed this in depth and while I accept the performance issues that exist, I do not see how having multiple instances of the same battle for the same planet as a fair way to do this.

I have suggested the alternative of having each planet, station, or other major location be it's own single instance weighted according to it's size and importance to the solar system. This way you can instance a battle for a solar system, yet still have the feeling of 1 battle, and you don't end up leaving players feeling screwed because they won their instance but still lost the planet they were fighting over. Something along these lines is the only way I can see PvP players being happy with instances and territory changes.


WWII Online did an amazing job with it's PvP system. It was a 100% persistent FvF game too. So, there's precedent for it being done.



Right, but if my map is going to be different than everyone elses because we all have to "share" what we find for others to see it, what's the point?

If the fact is you can only have 20 ship sided fights at the most i can already tell this is going to turn off some of the main fleet group people. Also you brought up a excellent point WW2 online which is a bit outdated now, brought the whole feel of combat and control actually meaning something to the MMO market. By the standards of a game over 10 years old now i think it is, still being one of the few to get it right is just sad. Also you dont have to take over all of the federation i would be happy with Neutral zone and boarders being conquerable. It would add a whole another dimension to this game cause currently it is severely lacking in the point of the fed/kling war. Overall this is starting to look like a CO/WOW simplified game for newcomers. Without some complexity to the game it defiantly wont last long for me.

[Manta2015]

Same thing happens on normal multiple servers that are full. By the time you clear the queue to log in, the event has passed.

The difference is someone is already playing in their respective shard -- And yet they miss out.

If there's no shards, then It's that person's fault that they're logged off and choose to log in their 'multiple' server just when something big happens.

It's not the same thing.


-Manta-

[Veglargh]

"Honestly this whole time we been talking about this, i forgot to mention the most important reason why i hate instanced enviornments. For a game that has faction warefare and supposed to have PVP it takes away the whole reason to have strategic locations to hold and defend. If one system is really valuable and holding it is very important to the war, it becomes useless when there are 20 instances of it and they change hands constantly. Again it takes away from the epicness of combat and immerison of the game.


I like your points Piotrek!

[Veglargh]

This system might make sense in a PvE game like CO (which I tried the Open Beta) but not a PvE and Faction vs Faction game like STO. I thought that the whole point of the neutral zone was for the factions to conquer/capture planets and resources. I think that others have basically expressed this, but how is this going to happen when there are other "instances" were no battles are going on? Does this mean that the fleet/group that just conquered that system has to do it 21 times by visiting each instance of the sector?

[Commander_Nate]

If the fact is you can only have 20 ship sided fights at the most i can already tell this is going to turn off some of the main fleet group people. Also you brought up a excellent point WW2 online which is a bit outdated now, brought the whole feel of combat and control actually meaning something to the MMO market. By the standards of a game over 10 years old now i think it is, still being one of the few to get it right is just sad. Also you dont have to take over all of the federation i would be happy with Neutral zone and boarders being conquerable. It would add a whole another dimension to this game cause currently it is severely lacking in the point of the fed/kling war. Overall this is starting to look like a CO/WOW simplified game for newcomers. Without some complexity to the game it defiantly wont last long for me.

Exactly my friend.

I also want to make it clear that we're trying to be constructive here and I hope Cryptic isn't interpreting our arguments as bashing them or anything. We're just concerned and trying to be helpful. I want this game to be groundbreaking and awesome!

We have to beat those Star Wars dorks!!!!!!!!

:mad:

[Cruis.In]

if you want a spaceship game with no instancing whatsoever play eve.

devs here could learn a lot from the devs at ccp when it comes to server technology.

there is a system in eve called Jita where theres almost constantly 1000 players which recently has no more lag.

but if you think of it, eve doesnt have walking in stations yet.

sto does...on hubs youll be inside a station. imagine 2000 people in one hub....

be very crowded.

[Manta2015]

there is a system in eve called Jita where theres almost constantly 1000 players which recently has no more lag.

Jita's always my favorite place to hang ~ there's always shenanigans going on there =)

There's definitely pros and cons to both, but the dedicated player gets hurt the most with shards in place.


-Manta-

[loyaltrekie]

if you want a spaceship game with no instancing whatsoever play eve.

devs here could learn a lot from the devs at ccp when it comes to server technology.

there is a system in eve called Jita where theres almost constantly 1000 players which recently has no more lag.

but if you think of it, eve doesnt have walking in stations yet.

sto does...on hubs youll be inside a station. imagine 2000 people in one hub....

be very crowded.

I don't see why people play the "go here play this" card. It hardly makes any points at all; if every game decided to not copy/enhance existing systems the genre would be complete garbage, so get over it.

Considering they are constantly pushing the "space is big", "big universe", etc card I would hardly think there would be too many places with 2000 people in it, so the point of arguing that is pretty moot if you ask me.

[Draconianknight]

I posted this elsewhere but belongs here as well
I am hoping that Cryptic will come to their senses before release of STO. EQ2 which isnt to bad to play uses limited instance for lairs as example. This allows more than one group to go after the big named mobs without having to worry about camping. In my opinon this is a plus. Otherwise I am hoping that STO be more like EVE...one big galaxy with everyone on at thesame time. Otherwise use the standard multiple servers and we pick one. But if they follow the everything has a multiple instance like CO. Well guys I am going to have to consider that a deal breaker and bow out of STO. I can not begin to describe how annoying that is.

[dryzabone]

I don't see why people play the "go here play this" card. It hardly makes any points at all; if every game decided to not copy/enhance existing systems the genre would be complete garbage, so get over it.

Considering they are constantly pushing the "space is big", "big universe", etc card I would hardly think there would be too many places with 2000 people in it, so the point of arguing that is pretty moot if you ask me.
Good point Trekkie, good point indeed.

[Cruis.In]

I don't see why people play the "go here play this" card. It hardly makes any points at all; if every game decided to not copy/enhance existing systems the genre would be complete garbage, so get over it.

Considering they are constantly pushing the "space is big", "big universe", etc card I would hardly think there would be too many places with 2000 people in it, so the point of arguing that is pretty moot if you ask me.

how many mmo you played? it is notoriously known throughout most of them, that no matter how much space there is, the most crowded places will be the hubs no matter what. mmos are so social. people just subscribe to chat. i can imagine 10k people alone who are trek fans who will subscribe just to make believe they are on a star base.

suppose this game has 1 million subscribers, can you imagine 2000 people in quarks bar? think about it. im all for persistence etc.

but mainly the only point that needs to be made is: they have already built the game. now they're adding content etc and doing the work to add the content, coding/artwork, more sound etc, mission design.

nothing is ever going to change about the instancing, so continuing to whine and post hundreds of threads about it serves no purpose. its not going to change.

this is why certain games especially one with a fan base like this dont like showing off certain things too far before release, because people get all in a frenzy before actually playing the game.

[LordDave]

I posted this elsewhere but belongs here as well
I am hoping that Cryptic will come to their senses before release of STO. EQ2 which isnt to bad to play uses limited instance for lairs as example. This allows more than one group to go after the big named mobs without having to worry about camping. In my opinon this is a plus. Otherwise I am hoping that STO be more like EVE...one big galaxy with everyone on at thesame time. Otherwise use the standard multiple servers and we pick one. But if they follow the everything has a multiple instance like CO. Well guys I am going to have to consider that a deal breaker and bow out of STO. I can not begin to describe how annoying that is.

They won't.

Take care dude.

[Draconianknight]

how many mmo you played? it is notoriously known throughout most of them, that no matter how much space there is, the most crowded places will be the hubs no matter what. mmos are so social. people just subscribe to chat. i can imagine 10k people alone who are trek fans who will subscribe just to make believe they are on a star base.

suppose this game has 1 million subscribers, can you imagine 2000 people in quarks bar? think about it. im all for persistence etc.

but mainly the only point that needs to be made is: they have already built the game. now they're adding content etc and doing the work to add the content, coding/artwork, more sound etc, mission design.

nothing is ever going to change about the instancing, so continuing to whine and post hundreds of threads about it serves no purpose. its not going to change.

this is why certain games especially one with a fan base like this dont like showing off certain things too far before release, because people get all in a frenzy before actually playing the game.

OK lets do a reality check. First of all if you believe the propaganda from Blizzard. They have millions of subscribers. They also have multiple servers and use some instancing. Not all of those subscribers are going to be on at the same time. Yes there are certian times with in a 24 hour period that there is a peak demand. But the reality is that the "Real World" rotates and there are time zones. Yes your are correct that MMO's by their very nature generate a social enviornment. But I highly doubt that you will ever see all and I mean ALL the subscribers logged on at the same time. I doubt there is any MMO out there that could handle that kind of demand.

[James.D.Burke]

I'd love to do a comparison study on how many people a WoW server holds and how many people per instance a CO shard holds.

This is the best point of interest in the thread so far. If the limit is 500 or 1000 toons in a zone then I'd say we'll be OK, but if its only 100 (or - egad! - less) than it may prove problematic with large groups.

Good question, did it get answered because I did not see any kind of response.

[WikiUltimate]

[...]

"Honestly this whole time we been talking about this, i forgot to mention the most important reason why i hate instanced enviornments. For a game that has faction warefare and supposed to have PVP it takes away the whole reason to have strategic locations to hold and defend. If one system is really valuable and holding it is very important to the war, it becomes useless when there are 20 instances of it and they change hands constantly. Again it takes away from the epicness of combat and immerison of the game.

[...]
This system might make sense in a PvE game like CO (which I tried the Open Beta) but not a PvE and Faction vs Faction game like STO. I thought that the whole point of the neutral zone was for the factions to conquer/capture planets and resources. I think that others have basically expressed this, but how is this going to happen when there are other "instances" were no battles are going on? Does this mean that the fleet/group that just conquered that system has to do it 21 times by visiting each instance of the sector?

QFE on both of these. They are very good points. Why even bother with PvP if there is nothing to "physicly" gain. Weve been told we will be able to "sway" a planets loyalty by how we enteract with them, so what would be the point if there are 4 "Planet Ys"?

[...]

If you're determined to dislike the game, that's up to you, but I found it engaging, fun and immersive, the instances didn't detract from it at all.
[...]


I'm glad they did not bother you, cuz they annoyed the (you know) out of me.

One thing i do have to say (again) is this is a Space game, not an all land based game like CO and CoX. In CO, Millenium City had over 100 missions on that 1 map, so it did need all the shards to house the 1000s of players doing those missions at once.

STO on the other had takes place in space, where missions are in individual systems and planets, shared by only your group (or in the case of a player even more). There are 1000s of star systems in Klingon and Federation space, which is what i would expect from STO, 1000s of systems, not only a hadful. So, the system EvE uses where a "zone" is not activated until some one jumps there could be easily used here. Sure EvE's developers have not released their system for it, but a smart team could come up with their own... my college programing class did.... Anyways, with so many systems, there would be no need for multi-system-shards. We will not need 3 Vulcans to chose from, or 5 Earths. One would be enough. Same goes for every other system in the game.

The exception of this is, of corse, Hubs. DS9, Starbase 1, etc... The interiors may very well have to be sharded (is that a word?) just for the sake of keeping lag to a minimum, but they should be larger shards, 1000 player type caps. Minimul instancing is the key, not instancing everything.

[DanSeale]

Out of curriosity .. let me throw this out and see if this "might" be close.

Remember the old SFC series where we had a map to move over. You really did not see your ship as such until you were engaged in combat. As a player moved across the "hexagons" to cross the map .. the player could opt to select missions as needed. Some spaces required missions to be selected. IF there were other players on that space anyone on that spot would be "drafted" into the mission that was selected. Some times (if I remember correctly) the Orion Pirates version the server host could customize the server to actually increase the "range" of the mission draft to include anyone within a couple of hexes away. BTW .. sometimes that could provide some very intertaining experiences for PvP and PvE .

note: back in those days it was not refered to as PvE .. it was called player vs AI.

No one say ANY ships from either faction ... only indicators of a ship on the screen or even the tatical map. ONCE a MISSION was selected .. any player who was drafted from EITHER faction would then appear in that mission that was being ran.

IN SFC-3 players from a players own faction were never dreafted in to a mission unless it was a PvP mission. IMHO this was a big mistake for SFC-3. Most of us play a game on line to play with others on line. To remove a critical element of that aspect of any on line game is a HUGE mistake.

IMHO he SFC OP game was the best for the balance in running missions with your team mates. BTW... the MOST that any of the games could draft was 6 from each side. That did not last for long .. no one to this day ever quite got the real answer as to what happened.

At any rate this is probably a very crude explaination of how the SFC series worked. This sounds somewhat like what we are discussing for STO. This comment is not intended to be ment as a slam against Cryptic for choosing this method IF it is infact what they are choosing. I enjoyed the SFC series. As long as we can draft as many of out buds into the missions as we need REGARDLESS of wheather it is PvE or PvP .. and have fun togeather as a team THAT would be my main concern.

NOW THEN .. I also think that if Cryptic is lookinf for a really huge top notch game .... it would be even better to see "space" (plantes etc ) as we travel from point A to point B. At the lest something like FreeLancer. The more cool detail and better graphics that a development team can put into the game will simply have those who buy the game drouling that much more !

Hmmm MAYBE Cryptic is doing something that would be kinda like a combination of the two ideas. That might explain the high useage of "instances" in the game.

I openly admit this is purely speculation at best. But for what ever it is worth .. I'm fine with it either way.

[Zepath]

NOW THEN .. I also think that if Cryptic is lookinf for a really huge top notch game .... it would be even better to see "space" (plantes etc ) as we travel from point A to point B. At the lest something like FreeLancer. The more cool detail and better graphics that a development team can put into the game will simply have those who buy the game drouling that much more !

I just don't think they are shooting for a "huge top notch game" Buzzard. I think they are looking for a niche game that will make them and Atari money off the Star Trek IP.

I don't blame them for that ... if you aren't gunning for the top guy (which we all know is Blizzard) then why beat yourself to death? Just make a game, that in the end, will draw a couple of hundred thousand long-term players, and move on to the next project.

If you don't think you have the product or the ability to create that game that can draw a couple of million long term players, there's nothing wrong with have having 5 games that have 200K-300K long term users.

Think about it. :)

[DanSeale]

I just don't think they are shooting for a "huge top notch game" Buzzard. I think they are looking for a niche game that will make them and Atari money off the Star Trek IP.

I don't blame them for that ... if you aren't gunning for the top guy (which we all know is Blizzard) then why beat yourself to death? Just make a game that in the end will draw a couple of hundred thousand long-term players, and move on to the next project.

If you don't think you have the product or the ability to create that game that can draw a couple of million long term players, there's nothing wrong with have having 5 games that have 200K-300K long term users.

Think about it. :)

Yeah .. I know. But I guess I'm probably VERY guilty of dreaming big dreams. Just like some of the ship designs. That has become a passion of mine . So much so that I just dropped 2k on a new system (and I still have not picked out the monitor, key board or mouse ). I'm building mu own desk (I'll post a pict when I'm done) .. I work an average of 55 hours a week) ... all that stuff.

I guess I have a tendency to throw myself into what ever I'm envolved with IF I REALLY like the game.

I did WoW for a while. I even have one of those models of my toon right after I finished getting the last piece of epic gear just before the lat XP wa released. That pack BTW kinda turned me off to WoW .. soooo I dropped out about 3 or 4 months ago. I spend my spare time doing more Trek Models and taking care of things around the house (like rebuilding the desk I made a couple years back).

I cant wait for STO to go public. Soooo yeah .. I'm still hoping for the best. In that context mediocrity is not the goal I'm looking for.

[Loekii]

I cant wait for STO to go public. Soooo yeah .. I'm still hoping for the best. In that context mediocrity is not the goal I'm looking for.

I am just hoping they can present a fun and captivating game for myself that captures enough other players, to support itself, prompt patches and a nice flow of expansion content.

[Zepath]

Yeah .. I know. But I guess I'm probably VERY guilty of dreaming big dreams. Just like some of the ship designs. That has become a passion of mine . So much so that I just dropped 2k on a new system (and I still have not picked out the monitor, key board or mouse ). I'm building mu own desk (I'll post a pict when I'm done) .. I work an average of 55 hours a week) ... all that stuff.

I guess I have a tendency to throw myself into what ever I'm envolved with IF I REALLY like the game.

I did WoW for a while. I even have one of those models of my toon right after I finished getting the last piece of epic gear just before the lat XP wa released. That pack BTW kinda turned me off to WoW .. soooo I dropped out about 3 or 4 months ago. I spend my spare time doing more Trek Models and taking care of things around the house (like rebuilding the desk I made a couple years back).

I cant wait for STO to go public. Soooo yeah .. I'm still hoping for the best. In that context mediocrity is not the goal I'm looking for.

I wouldn't go as far as to say "mediocre" ... I don't think its in Zinc's blood to make a "mediocre" game. I just think that many here in these forums are expecting way too much from this product.

I have to look at the information we have ... you pick up the IP at the last minute, out of the ashes of another company ... you build it with an engine we all know was created to make Super Hero games, and you basically rush it to market. All indications that you saw an opportunity and grabbed it.

I think there are three things that tell the story for this game ...


March 31, 2010
Interiors
Immediate Rank Gratification

Now, that doesn't mean they won't take the money from CO and STO and over the next 5 or 6 years write STO II. We're just talking about STO.

[Piotrek]

Out of curriosity .. let me throw this out and see if this "might" be close.

Remember the old SFC series where we had a map to move over. You really did not see your ship as such until you were engaged in combat. As a player moved across the "hexagons" to cross the map .. the player could opt to select missions as needed. Some spaces required missions to be selected. IF there were other players on that space anyone on that spot would be "drafted" into the mission that was selected. Some times (if I remember correctly) the Orion Pirates version the server host could customize the server to actually increase the "range" of the mission draft to include anyone within a couple of hexes away. BTW .. sometimes that could provide some very intertaining experiences for PvP and PvE .

note: back in those days it was not refered to as PvE .. it was called player vs AI.

No one say ANY ships from either faction ... only indicators of a ship on the screen or even the tatical map. ONCE a MISSION was selected .. any player who was drafted from EITHER faction would then appear in that mission that was being ran.

IN SFC-3 players from a players own faction were never dreafted in to a mission unless it was a PvP mission. IMHO this was a big mistake for SFC-3. Most of us play a game on line to play with others on line. To remove a critical element of that aspect of any on line game is a HUGE mistake.

IMHO he SFC OP game was the best for the balance in running missions with your team mates. BTW... the MOST that any of the games could draft was 6 from each side. That did not last for long .. no one to this day ever quite got the real answer as to what happened.

At any rate this is probably a very crude explaination of how the SFC series worked. This sounds somewhat like what we are discussing for STO. This comment is not intended to be ment as a slam against Cryptic for choosing this method IF it is infact what they are choosing. I enjoyed the SFC series. As long as we can draft as many of out buds into the missions as we need REGARDLESS of wheather it is PvE or PvP .. and have fun togeather as a team THAT would be my main concern.

NOW THEN .. I also think that if Cryptic is lookinf for a really huge top notch game .... it would be even better to see "space" (plantes etc ) as we travel from point A to point B. At the lest something like FreeLancer. The more cool detail and better graphics that a development team can put into the game will simply have those who buy the game drouling that much more !

Hmmm MAYBE Cryptic is doing something that would be kinda like a combination of the two ideas. That might explain the high useage of "instances" in the game.

I openly admit this is purely speculation at best. But for what ever it is worth .. I'm fine with it either way.

Just figured i point you out that one of the threads on here has video photo age from Pax showing the map system in its full aspects. So you might want to find the Favorite screens from video thread that's probably on the first or second page.

One thing i wanted to add is anyone else getting a Earth and Beyond feel to this game looking at some of these screens minus the instances. Cause its been awhile but if i remember right even earth and beyond used none to a minimum amount of instances (if anyone knows for sure just say so, its been a long time).

Overall this game is looking like they are just putting together a C+/B- game to get them a HUGE draw of people in the opening months but then will feather away to a few hundred thousand. Then after a year or two will just die out, while as others said work on another STO Game. If this is the case its just not doing ST franchise justice, and i would not mind these guys going bankrupt and their rights to the game being sold to a more established and innovative company. Even if i have to wait another 2-3 years before i see a game. I rather see a top notch first attempt then a void looking for money.

[DanSeale]

I wouldn't go as far as to say "mediocre" ... I don't think its in Zinc's blood to make a "mediocre" game. I just think that many here in these forums are expecting way too much from this product.

I have to look at the information we have ... you pick up the IP at the last minute, out of the ashes of another company ... you build it with an engine we all know was created to make Super Hero games, and you basically rush it to market. All indications that you saw an opportunity and grabbed it.

I think there are three things that tell the story for this game ...


March 31, 2010
Interiors
Immediate Rank Gratification

Now, that doesn't mean they won't take the money from CO and STO and over the next 5 or 6 years write STO II. We're just talking about STO.

Understood ...

BTW.. I probably should have stated right up fron that I in no way think that what Crytpic is doing is plain or simple or mediocre. I don't. I used that term as a contrast to what I find my self getting envolved with. IMHO STO has the prospect of being far from just another MMO. And in that contest that is what I really hope to see.

And as Loekii has well pointed out in another thread I also hope that the game is fun and does in fact captivate the audience that will log on ... so much so that those who do .. will want to stay.

I must have really messed up on my last post since a couple folks seemed to have completely overlooked everything else that was said .. and seemed to zoom in on one word.

YIKES !

:eek:

my bad !

Anyone even get the point that I was asking about the movement and engaging in player activity as being some what similar to SFC series.

BTW.. once again .. iMHO that is not neccessarily a bad thing .. just still discussing some of the mechanics. OH also ... by similar I do not mean exactly as SFC series in movement .. but as much as anything how and WHEN you might see other players ships / toons .. etc. Off hand I'm guessing that movement might be a lot like Freelancer.

[Zepath]

Nah, I read the rest of your post ... and I don't mean to make you feel like you have to go checking your words big guy ... I apologize for that.

All is good, I know where you're coming from.

I just decided to respond to that one aspect of your post. Sort of like when the Dev's choose to only respond to one aspect of our questions and ignore the rest. :)

[Galv]

Understood ...

BTW.. I probably should have stated right up fron that I in no way think that what Crytpic is doing is plain or simple or mediocre. I don't. I used that term as a contrast to what I find my self getting envolved with. IMHO STO has the prospect of being far from just another MMO. And in that contest that is what I really hope to see.

And as Loekii has well pointed out in another thread I also hope that the game is fun and does in fact captivate the audience that will log on ... so much so that those who do .. will want to stay.

I must have really messed up on my last post since a couple folks seemed to have completely overlooked everything else that was said .. and seemed to zoom in on one word.

YIKES !

:eek:

my bad !


Anyone even get the point that I was asking about the movement and engaging in player activity as being some what similar to SFC series.

BTW.. once again .. iMHO that is not neccessarily a bad thing .. just still discussing some of the mechanics. OH also ... by similar I do not mean exactly as SFC series in movement .. but as much as anything how and WHEN you might see other players ships / toons .. etc. Off hand I'm guessing that movement might be a lot like Freelancer.

Have you ever played Pirates of the Burning Sea? From the new Germany vids with Craig i got the impression that it will be something like that game in the way that it handles the instances.

[DanSeale]

Have you ever played Pirates of the Burning Sea? From the new Germany vids with Craig i got the impression that it will be something like that game in the way that it handles the instances.

Sorry .. I have not. I've heard about it through a couple of friends .. but no I have not played the game.

(/scratches head) ... I still as currious as ever as to how this will be played .

hehehe

I guess I'm like a little kid waiting on a new toy he spotted in the store. I know it's on the way .. just can't wait to get my hands on it !

:D

[thefrayl]

I guess I'm like a little kid waiting on a new toy he spotted in the store. I know it's on the way .. just can't wait to get my hands on it !

:D

You and me both, Buzzard. I haven't felt such genuine excitement over a game in many years. I really can't wait for the coming day next year when I walk into a game retailer and say "I'm here to pick up my pre-ordered copy of Star Trek Online".

Get's me giddy just thinking about it. LoL.

[Galv]

Sorry .. I have not. I've heard about it through a couple of friends .. but no I have not played the game.

(/scratches head) ... I still as currious as ever as to how this will be played .

hehehe

I guess I'm like a little kid waiting on a new toy he spotted in the store. I know it's on the way .. just can't wait to get my hands on it !

:D

It might be worth watching some vids on how the open sea world works with instance and ports and they do have a 12 day trail. It's about as close i can get to knowing what STO might be like.

[Zepath]

I dunno ... Burning Seas appears to be based on a player-driven economy and player crafting. While I love that sort of thing, many here do not, and Cryptic doesn't appear to be interested in it.

Which incidentally, along with MT's, is one of the reasons I still haven't decided on STO.

[Cruis.In]

whats this march 31st date, what did i miss?

[andrewprofit]

whitecastles

[Loekii]

Sorry .. I have not. I've heard about it through a couple of friends .. but no I have not played the game.

(/scratches head) ... I still as currious as ever as to how this will be played .

hehehe

I guess I'm like a little kid waiting on a new toy he spotted in the store. I know it's on the way .. just can't wait to get my hands on it !

:D

I see it as rather than laying out zones so that they are side by side and connected by an 'exit/entrance door', the zones are set up in a non-linear form.

It is sort of like how on an old Cassette tape, you had to 'fast forward' through the tape to get to a song, but on an Ipod, you can simply randomly select a song without having to scroll through songs infront of it.

So as you are flying in Sector space, you are not flying 'over' zones, but rather you are just flying in space, and any time you need a zone, it 'appears' for you. Does that make sense?

[Loekii]

whats this march 31st date, what did i miss?

Atari told their share holders that STO will be released this fiscal year, which ends March 31, 2010 -- so that is being considered the 'latest' release date for STO (barring any major issues).

[DanSeale]

I see it as rather than laying out zones so that they are side by side and connected by an 'exit/entrance door', the zones are set up in a non-linear form.

It is sort of like how on an old Cassette tape, you had to 'fast forward' through the tape to get to a song, but on an Ipod, you can simply randomly select a song without having to scroll through songs infront of it.

So as you are flying in Sector space, you are not flying 'over' zones, but rather you are just flying in space, and any time you need a zone, it 'appears' for you. Does that make sense?

yeah .. I think so. It still kinda sounds some what like Freelancer .. sort of .. maybe with a different approach to what appears on the screen while a player is in flight . Once you get to that destination is sort of sounds like the SFC series when it comes to engaging the varrious missions.

BTW... that's okie too.

[LordDave]

I'm going to toss my hat into the "Multiple Servers" crowd only because, it was brought to my attention, that PVP guild bases won't exist with a sharded server.
It also limits fleet sizes, group sizes, ect...
Granted, it limits them to probably 2,000 but still, limits.
I'd rather have a physical limit of people rather then a limit of shard space.

[Galv]

I dunno ... Burning Seas appears to be based on a player-driven economy and player crafting. While I love that sort of thing, many here do not, and Cryptic doesn't appear to be interested in it.

Which incidentally, along with MT's, is one of the reasons I still haven't decided on STO.

Yea it is, but i'm only thinking on how they handle the instance side of things with the open sea and ports.

[Loekii]

I'm going to toss my hat into the "Multiple Servers" crowd only because, it was brought to my attention, that PVP guild bases won't exist with a sharded server.

I do not believe they ever said that there would be 'PVP Guild' bases in the first place, so I would not blame their exclusion on the single server set up.

[LordDave]

I do not believe they ever said that there would be 'PVP Guild' bases in the first place, so I would not blame their exclusion on the single server set up.

Well yes, but it means they can't have it even if people want them.

[blujester]

Well yes, but it means they can't have it even if people want them.



Actually it doesn't mean that at all. There would be no reason to instance a system or base assigned to one Fleet but it would probably be limited to Fleet members or invites only. You wouldn't get raided But if you did.. there would be a dynamic where the raid would have to be from another fleet/house and it would be concentual and scheduled. To do otherwise as in EVE would be no fun for the majority of players as who wants to log in and find out there base was destroyed last nite in a sneak attack while undefended. Even EVE has some pretty heavy safegaurds against this. But nothing in the instanceing system would preclude fleet owned systems or structures at all.



Bj

[Piotrek]

Actually it doesn't mean that at all. There would be no reason to instance a system or base assigned to one Fleet but it would probably be limited to Fleet members or invites only. You wouldn't get raided But if you did.. there would be a dynamic where the raid would have to be from another fleet/house and it would be concentual and scheduled. To do otherwise as in EVE would be no fun for the majority of players as who wants to log in and find out there base was destroyed last nite in a sneak attack while undefended. Even EVE has some pretty heavy safegaurds against this. But nothing in the instanceing system would preclude fleet owned systems or structures at all.



Bj

It like you dont know anything about the game of EVE at all. For one you cant lose a base overnight in eve unless your to dumb to fill up its fuel supplies. Once the main shield goes on the POS (player owned station) you get a 24 hour time window before the invulnerability shield falls and the fuel runs out. So you have more then enough time to muster a defense.

Also attacking a starbase in this game already seems lame since your max fleet size can only be 20 ships on each side per one of the earlier mentioned facts from a dev post if i remember right.

Why it seems lame, had to add this in, can you imagine attacking DS9 with a fleet of only 20 ships would be the fastest ended battle in history.

[Kriss]

It like you dont know anything about the game of EVE at all. For one you cant lose a base overnight in eve unless your to dumb to fill up its fuel supplies. Once the main shield goes on the POS (player owned station) you get a 24 hour time window before the invulnerability shield falls and the fuel runs out. So you have more then enough time to muster a defense.

Also attacking a starbase in this game already seems lame since your max fleet size can only be 20 ships on each side per one of the earlier mentioned facts from a dev post if i remember right.

Why it seems lame, had to add this in, can you imagine attacking DS9 with a fleet of only 20 ships would be the fastest ended battle in history.


Actually the time on the POS in EVE can range anywhere from 1 hr. to 36hrs depending on how much emergency fuel is in it. That gives the defenders the ability to time the defense of that structure to their advantage.

But anyways... Yea, I would like to know HOW you can have viable PvP and anything owned by players if everything is instanced to hell and back?

Logic dictates you can't! Especially if there are player cap limits. Its either you flood the system with friendlies or you get locked out and end up in an instance where you don't have any structures or FvF going on.

Sorry, but that ain't gonna fly. You'll **** off your PvP base right quick.

[Zepath]

Actually the time on the POS in EVE can range anywhere from 1 hr. to 36hrs depending on how much emergency fuel is in it. That gives the defenders the ability to time the defense of that structure to their advantage.

But anyways... Yea, I would like to know HOW you can have viable PvP and anything owned by players if everything is instanced to hell and back?

Logic dictates you can't! Especially if there are player cap limits. Its either you flood the system with friendlies or you get locked out and end up in an instance where you don't have any structures or FvF going on.

Sorry, but that ain't gonna fly. You'll **** off your PvP base right quick.

Well, one of my unanswered question about all this instancing, is, they show that galactic map you use to travel in, and they say you can see the players on it .... does that mean an entire galaxy, sector, whatever they are calling it, is going to be instanced?

If the answer is yes, then that means its going to be a very lonely game. If the answer is no, then when you see someone on that map, how the hell do you know what instance they are in?

The bottom line is, Cryptic needs to chime in on this ... a) are they in fact going to have CO style instancing, and b) if so, how compartmentalized is it going to be? Letting us just run amok here in these forums trying to figure this out on our own is not doing us, or the game any good.

[Kriss]

Well, one of my unanswered question about all this instancing, is, they show that galactic map you use to travel in, and they say you can see the players on it .... does that mean an entire galaxy, sector, whatever they are calling it, is going to be instanced?

If the answer is yes, then that means its going to be a very lonely game. If the answer is no, then when you see someone on that map, how the hell do you know what instance they are in?

The bottom line is, Cryptic needs to chime in on this ... a) are they in fact going to have CO style instancing, and b) if so, how compartmentalized is it going to be? Letting us just run amok here in these forums trying to figure this out on our own is not doing us, or the game any good.

From the understanding I have, just about anything will be instanced.
Say you have sector 222. Once this sector reaches XXX number of people, its going to spawn another instance. Pretty damn cheap. So much for one big game world...(false advertising at its best).

Then you hit DS9. Again, once you hit **400 peeps, another instance. Anyone else extra goes into this new area. So the population gets split yet again.

Then you hit quarks bar. Oh darn, 300 people here plus the 400 on DS9. So BAM! Another instance. Now you look around the bar and see a few tables full and only a handful of people at the bar. Gee, that just sounds like a blast doesn't it. Quarks went from 300 people down to 25. OH GOD I LOVE INSTANCES.

Then add in the guy you talk to and accept a mission from him. WIZZ BAM WING! ANOTHER INSTANCE! Guess what, NO ONE but yourself is there. I guess space is cold and lonely......in Cryptics eyes anyways.

Thats my personal take on what I have read.

Thats why this game will die a horrible death.

[blujester]

It like you dont know anything about the game of EVE at all. For one you cant lose a base overnight in eve unless your to dumb to fill up its fuel supplies. Once the main shield goes on the POS (player owned station) you get a 24 hour time window before the invulnerability shield falls and the fuel runs out. So you have more then enough time to muster a defense.

Also attacking a starbase in this game already seems lame since your max fleet size can only be 20 ships on each side per one of the earlier mentioned facts from a dev post if i remember right.

Why it seems lame, had to add this in, can you imagine attacking DS9 with a fleet of only 20 ships would be the fastest ended battle in history.



First off, My small corp was hit by BoB one nite in a sneak attack when no one was on and they did take out our station before we could defend it. We were low on fuel but not drastically low and 4 Dreds and a couple of hours was all it took.

Second the max size of a team does not equal max population. Multiple teams can coordinate so there could be 20 or 10 groups of 20 in an attack.

And thirdly there would be no reason to create 2 versions of your Fleet owned zone if access was restricted to agreed upon battles or invites. There would be no reason to hard cap population at all but they may set it at 200 or so just to keep the lag down localy.


Untill we get some confirmation on player owned structures which I don't expect at launch it's a moot point.



Bj

[loyaltrekie]

how many mmo you played?
Without the need to go into detail; I have played every C+ MMO that has come around in some form for the past 10 years.

but mainly the only point that needs to be made is: they have already built the game
Your point is not valid and quite moot; the video game genre is all about adaptability, modernization and other things of the like. If you have ever played any MMO you would know that(for lack of a better phrase) "the ground you stand on; won't always be the same". Games can change pre-release, in beta, post release, etc. Arguing "hurr durr game is made" is not a valid argument, so don't try it. If anything I'll just point to SWG and that will show you; that nothing is unchangeable in the genre.

nothing is ever going to change about the instancing, so continuing to whine and post hundreds of threads about it serves no purpose. its not going to change.
Once again; a moot point, one that has no basis in fact. If enough people "whine" and they lose a "metric ass ton" of subs due to x feature; it sure as hell will go into discussion on how to change and fix. So go away with your childish points.

this is why certain games especially one with a fan base like this dont like showing off certain things too far before release, because people get all in a frenzy before actually playing the game.

I wonder, how many hours you have been in a PR position, or if you have any education in the field at all?

[Nubadak]

Yeah the Instancing question is a biggy.....almost as big as this one..

http://forums.startrekonline.com/showthread.php?t=15180&page=6&highlight=pakled

lol!

Enjoy the links!

Nubs

[blujester]

What people don't seem to understand is this, if you want a crowd, pick instance one..it will be crowded hazaa!! If you are in a hurry and just want to get in and get out, pick the last instance as it will be a little less busy. I do not see what all the fuss is about. If you have a friend you want to hook up with, you can do that easy. If you want to be alone you can do that too. If you want to go to the nuetral zone and pvp you can and you will find fights. No fights in the nuetral zone are going to change the boarder itself. They only influence the loyalty of the factions within the nuetral zone and it would seem it matters not which instance you win in, a win is a win and a loss is a loss. This, as I've said before, is much adu about nothing.

They will open instance 2 long before pop cap and they will not que you for instances EVER.

Bj

[Piotrek]

What people don't seem to understand is this, if you want a crowd, pick instance one..it will be crowded hazaa!! If you are in a hurry and just want to get in and get out, pick the last instance as it will be a little less busy. I do not see what all the fuss is about. If you have a friend you want to hook up with, you can do that easy. If you want to be alone you can do that too. If you want to go to the nuetral zone and pvp you can and you will find fights. No fights in the nuetral zone are going to change the boarder itself. They only influence the loyalty of the factions within the nuetral zone and it would seem it matters not which instance you win in, a win is a win and a loss is a loss. This, as I've said before, is much adu about nothing.

They will open instance 2 long before pop cap and they will not que you for instances EVER.

Bj

The problem is it ruins the immersion of hte game to always be jumping instances if you want to play solo go play a single player game, you want to play a MMO you have to put up with the MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER Aspect of it. Instances take away from as i mentioned before any strategic value of combat on a galactic type scope. They ruin the feel of the MMO cause it dont matter how many people are on you should always see and be able to interact with everyone at all times, without having to switch to a instance. Also if anyone argues the lag point again im just going to puke, if the net coders know what they are doing there could be 1000+ people in the same location and it should not slow down. A good example of that is Jita in eve online its perfectly smooth in jita with over 1000 people in the same location. Thats thanks to their great engine, their engine upgrades, and their ability to properly manage network load on their servers.

Another reason that the whole lag point is just dumb is cause not everyone in this game will be able to be in the same place at the same time. DS9 for example Federation controlled space so only feds, but why would everyone in the federation want to only be at DS9 when you have earth, vulcan, and many other planets to boldly go to which no instance has gone before. If you forgot they mention exploration is a big portion of this game which means going out and seeing the quadrant. Not to mention real life player cycles will prevent everyone in this game from being on at the same time, unless we all give up on jobs and sleep. Which is only prone to happen for the first few days of release at the most.

As i mentioned before instances just show the lack of any true skil on the end of the design team to properly manage their servers and having to properly code the net code for this game.

[blujester]

The problem is it ruins the immersion of hte game to always be jumping instances if you want to play solo go play a single player game, you want to play a MMO you have to put up with the MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER Aspect of it. Instances take away from as i mentioned before any strategic value of combat on a galactic type scope. They ruin the feel of the MMO cause it dont matter how many people are on you should always see and be able to interact with everyone at all times, without having to switch to a instance. Also if anyone argues the lag point again im just going to puke, if the net coders know what they are doing there could be 1000+ people in the same location and it should not slow down. A good example of that is Jita in eve online its perfectly smooth in jita with over 1000 people in the same location. Thats thanks to their great engine, their engine upgrades, and their ability to properly manage network load on their servers.

Another reason that the whole lag point is just dumb is cause not everyone in this game will be able to be in the same place at the same time. DS9 for example Federation controlled space so only feds, but why would everyone in the federation want to only be at DS9 when you have earth, vulcan, and many other planets to boldly go to which no instance has gone before. If you forgot they mention exploration is a big portion of this game which means going out and seeing the quadrant. Not to mention real life player cycles will prevent everyone in this game from being on at the same time, unless we all give up on jobs and sleep. Which is only prone to happen for the first few days of release at the most.

As i mentioned before instances just show the lack of any true skil on the end of the design team to properly manage their servers and having to properly code the net code for this game.

I hate to break it to you friend but if choosing to pick an instance or choosing to have it autopicked for you is too imersion breaking for you then no game ever will satisfy you on modern hardware. You mention Jita which I hear is lag free now... from you... not from the 3 dozen friends I have who play it. Well if 3 years of lagfest Jita is suddenly cured I can bet it is because they finaly got around to setting a dedicated node server to that system alone because at one time you could, and I was , be stuck there for a week just trying to get to a warp point out. And thats with a C2D 6750 on a 12mbt connect. It wasn't my end. It was theirs.

If your idea of a good game is Quarks bar so crowded you can't even make it to the Darbo tables then by all means go to instance 1 and be happy. If that breaks the imersion to much for you then Cryptic will have to do without your sub. But they'll have mine as long as the game works and I have fun. And it sounds like it will and I will so far. CCP built there engine differently and because of it they have only recently achieved the Gold standard of a mere 100K subscribers. This after what? 4 years it's been out? If they were based out of Socal or NY they would never have survived past the first year on subs. Iceland is a cheap place to run a buissness, or was, we'll see now that the economy has tanked. And don't get me started about BoB and the dev interferance and outrite cheating. Or gold farms or sold accounts or all the rest. I've seen intire corps sold on Ebay to a noob or enemy corp member who raped the wallet and made off with everything. This will not be that game and for that we can be thankful.


Bj

[Loekii]

Also attacking a starbase in this game already seems lame since your max fleet size can only be 20 ships on each side per one of the earlier mentioned facts from a dev post if i remember right.

Happen to have that link?

Without the link, I would say you are mistaken, as we have seen the devs talk about their 200 person battle in Twitter and IRC.

[Kinjiru]

Happen to have that link?

Without the link, I would say you are mistaken, as we have seen the devs talk about their 200 person battle in Twitter and IRC.

Group/fleet size probably doesn't have anything to do with the size of a battle. (If, indeed there IS a max group size of 20 ships, dunno, I hadn't heard that.)

I'm sure that a 200 person battle would be made up of many 2+ ship groups. :)

I do know that they've said that there will be no upper limit to the number of players in a fleet. (Guild)

[loyaltrekie]

IYou mention Jita which I hear is lag free now... from you... not from the 3 dozen friends I have who play it.
j

Could you happen to give me there names in game so I could seek them out and ask them why they are lieing about a video game of all things? Seems pretty silly to me to lie about a game, definitely one that you are subscribed to.

P.S. Jita is quite "lag resistant" while for some people its not completely lag free; its hardly noticeable to the majority of the population I'm sure. It's weird that you have 36 friends who would all experience the same thing, and not one whom are one of the majority not having an issue. It seems to me your friends need to band together and get ahold of CCP since they all most be on the same ISP to be having issues.

[Azurian]

I'm checking on this now, but from a technology standpoint, it wouldn't be feasible to have thousands of players on the galaxy map.

Really, the game works like I described it above. Different maps have different population limits, and you can move between different instances of the maps as you like to group up with other people as you desire.

Come now, Rekhan. It is very possible to show everyone on the Galactic Map. All you have to do is keep things really simple, and show people as simple dots.

If you want to find specific people, you just have a tool that would only find that person. Or you zoom into sector maps in seeing a list of people who are there.

[Piotrek]

I hate to break it to you friend but if choosing to pick an instance or choosing to have it autopicked for you is too imersion breaking for you then no game ever will satisfy you on modern hardware. You mention Jita which I hear is lag free now... from you... not from the 3 dozen friends I have who play it. Well if 3 years of lagfest Jita is suddenly cured I can bet it is because they finaly got around to setting a dedicated node server to that system alone because at one time you could, and I was , be stuck there for a week just trying to get to a warp point out. And thats with a C2D 6750 on a 12mbt connect. It wasn't my end. It was theirs.

If your idea of a good game is Quarks bar so crowded you can't even make it to the Darbo tables then by all means go to instance 1 and be happy. If that breaks the imersion to much for you then Cryptic will have to do without your sub. But they'll have mine as long as the game works and I have fun. And it sounds like it will and I will so far. CCP built there engine differently and because of it they have only recently achieved the Gold standard of a mere 100K subscribers. This after what? 4 years it's been out? If they were based out of Socal or NY they would never have survived past the first year on subs. Iceland is a cheap place to run a buissness, or was, we'll see now that the economy has tanked. And don't get me started about BoB and the dev interferance and outrite cheating. Or gold farms or sold accounts or all the rest. I've seen intire corps sold on Ebay to a noob or enemy corp member who raped the wallet and made off with everything. This will not be that game and for that we can be thankful.


Bj


You missed the major point i was trying to make in most of that, which is people cycles and exploration should keep the numbers to a reasonable amount.

As for lowekill it was a quote in either this thread or the sharding thread that is now like on the 6th or so page cause we had too many threads on instances. I didnt say it was 100% right but thats what was quoted off someone.

[Zepath]

Come now, Rekhan. It is very possible to show everyone on the Galactic Map. All you have to do is keep things really simple, and show people as simple dots.

If you want to find specific people, you just have a tool that would only find that person. Or you zoom into sector maps in seeing a list of people who are there.

Well, it goes even further than that ... in his reference to "how it works like up above", he's talking about being able to change instances immediately without having to go back to a node/spawn point.

Of course again, reading between the lines, that means there's not going to be a open map scenarios of having to fight your way to a particular location ... or that you'll be able to exploit the system by following a group who clears the way, and then when you get where you want, just drop into another instance.

::shakes head:: Both those scenarios are lose/lose for the players in my opinion.

[Piotrek]

Well, it goes even further than that ... in his reference to "how it works like up above", he's talking about being able to change instances immediately without having to go back to a node/spawn point.

Of course again, reading between the lines, that means there's not going to be a open map scenarios of having to fight your way to a particular location ... or that you'll be able to exploit the system by following a group who clears the way, and then when you get where you want, just drop into another instance.

::shakes head:: Both those scenarios are lose/lose for the players in my opinion.

Yep defintly agree, instancing as mentioned before has its place but only on a very small scale. Everything else in a MMO should be made persistent or else its not really a MMO.

[slingbladez]

Yep defintly agree, instancing as mentioned before has its place but only on a very small scale. Everything else in a MMO should be made persistent or else its not really a MMO.

If they manage to get 500 ships in an instance that isn't the massive part of massive multiplayer online game?

[Zepath]

If they manage to get 500 ships in an instance that isn't the massive part of massive multiplayer online game?

Well, I think you're being a little optimistic ... but if people are passing each other in different instances and not meeting, then yeah, it sort of defeats the entire point of an MMO (for me ... clearly not for some others).

[Piotrek]

If they manage to get 500 ships in an instance that isn't the massive part of massive multiplayer online game?

Also like hey mentioned from the sharding thread that we were discussing in earlier, it has already been mentioned that the CO engine at the most could only support 200 CO characters at the most. They tried 300 and it was really bad lag, so yeah keep dreaming. With the hopefully larger environments cause the CO environment is kind of small anyway, i dont see them even hitting the 200 in this game, and currently will stick to my prediction of 50-100. 50 is what was mentioned by others, with the intention to expand it if it needed it. Also that's why i also mentioned a max fleet size of 20 per side cause if the instance can only support 50 right out the gate good luck to you getting anything near a MASSIVE conflict!

[Loekii]

Well, I think you're being a little optimistic ... but if people are passing each other in different instances and not meeting, then yeah, it sort of defeats the entire point of an MMO (for me ... clearly not for some others).

Did you play the CO beta?

Each Instance is almost exactly like a zone in WoW, EQ, etc.

You are constantly passing by other players doing their quests, killing mobs, talking to NPCs, LFG, etc. There were even Public Quests, where you entered an area of a zone and collectively worked to specific quest goals (ie kill 50 Bugman, collect 30 cannon pieces, defend the canon from attack, etc).

I encountered more people in CO, than I did in WAR.

Using this screenshot and projecting what I saw in CO, this would be part of an Instance (instance is bigger), and all of the people are players (with about another 40 players scattered over the ridges in other areas of this zone).

It was really populated in CO, so I can see may players passing by each other in the public instances of STO.

[Piotrek]

Did you play the CO beta?

Each Instance is almost exactly like a zone in WoW, EQ, etc.

You are constantly passing by other players doing their quests, killing mobs, talking to NPCs, LFG, etc. There were even Public Quests, where you entered an area of a zone and collectively worked to specific quest goals (ie kill 50 Bugman, collect 30 cannon pieces, defend the canon from attack, etc).

I encountered more people in CO, than I did in WAR.

Using this screenshot and projecting what I saw in CO, this would be part of an Instance (instance is bigger), and all of the people are players (with about another 40 players scattered over the ridges in other areas of this zone).

It was really populated in CO, so I can see may players passing by each other in the public instances of STO.

That is called a tutorial zone, and the funny part which you seemed to miss is that even that is instanced. Unlike WAR which separates starting areas based on race/profession so you don't all START in the same area. Also what if i was the type of person in a pvp zone i would want to attack anyone that crosses a certain area, i would only be able to attack so many less people or have a huge waiting game if i decided to camp out a location that really was not frequented more then once or twice on the instance i am on but unknowingly 10-20+ times on another instance. In this situation i missing out.

[Mozcol]

Did you play the CO beta?

Each Instance is almost exactly like a zone in WoW, EQ, etc.

You are constantly passing by other players doing their quests, killing mobs, talking to NPCs, LFG, etc. There were even Public Quests, where you entered an area of a zone and collectively worked to specific quest goals (ie kill 50 Bugman, collect 30 cannon pieces, defend the canon from attack, etc).

I encountered more people in CO, than I did in WAR.

The part 4 of 4 vid has that guy clearly saying, to me at least, you only come across other players on the Galaxy map and in Starbases. And if you had seen the Galaxy map its not really a great meeting ground for players since its just a quick lay-over to find the planet your going to Warp to. At this point the only real interaction that can be accomplished, in my view, is the Starbases.

[Loekii]

The part 4 of 4 vid has that guy clearly saying, to me at least, you only come across other players on the Galaxy map and in Starbases. And if you had seen the Galaxy map its not really a great meeting ground for players since its just a quick lay-over to find the planet your going to Warp to. At this point the only real interaction that can be accomplished, in my view, is the Starbases.

If that is the case, then yes, its a questionable set up.

However, as CO demonstrated, that is not a limitation of the instance system, but rather a limitation in the design choice.

Now, I do not think that will be the case, and I expect that there will be areas of 3D space, where we will be crossing paths with other players -- ie flying through an asteroid belt hunting pirate raiders, while other players are mining that belt, while others are heading to the small research station on one of the asteriods, and others are heading towards the planet, etc.

[Griffin]

The major difference between STO's server setup and CO's is that CO had numerous zones, each of which was sharded, STO will have only 1 zone, also called the Galaxy map. This Galaxy map will also be sharded, for instance, when you leave Starbase 1 shard 3, you will also have to select a Galaxy map shard from a list (or have it autoselect for you).

I don;t think the Starbase 1 sharding is the real issue, but rather the sharding of the overall map, the Galaxy map.

There will be no persistant, player influenced changes to the game. All this talk about areas of the neutral zone changing hands, all this competitve PvE... how can it work in a sharded universe? What my fleet achieves in shard 4 won't appear in shard 8.

This is what Cryptic have chosen to scrap, in favour of a simplistic, scripted universe. What has yet to be seen, is if all this talk of 'fun' will keep people glued to the screen playing STO, because I can you all something, the endless customisation, the episodic missions and the endless wonders of the Genesis system most CERTAINLY will not.

[slingbladez]

Also like hey mentioned from the sharding thread that we were discussing in earlier, it has already been mentioned that the CO engine at the most could only support 200 CO characters at the most. They tried 300 and it was really bad lag, so yeah keep dreaming. With the hopefully larger environments cause the CO environment is kind of small anyway, i dont see them even hitting the 200 in this game, and currently will stick to my prediction of 50-100. 50 is what was mentioned by others, with the intention to expand it if it needed it. Also that's why i also mentioned a max fleet size of 20 per side cause if the instance can only support 50 right out the gate good luck to you getting anything near a MASSIVE conflict!

Actually i already knew of the 200 player limit, i was just using that as example in order to gauge your definition of massive. It succeeded with you showing you having pessimism on the engine in general and not specifically instances. You mentioned the 200 limit, this limit would be the case if they had instances or only one instance of that zone because as you said it can't go over that without severe lag. Having multiple servers with no instances doesn't magically increase the amount of people allowed in the zone without severe lag past a certain limit, the limits of the engine will always be the same. If you propose they just only have one instance but allow more than 200 and just live with the lag, they could do the same with instances by improving the player cap.

How would it be any more massive if they had multiple servers but a limit of 200 players per zone as you gave examples the engine can't handle anymore? Wouldn't that suck if you weren't be able to get into the zone and because you guys hate instances so much cryptic refuses to make an instance of that zone to let you into? Or if they had no cap and allowed anyone to come in would you be happy when 300-400 people were in the zone and it became severely laggy and unplayable?

[Zepath]

How would it be any more massive if they had multiple servers but a limit of 200 players per zone as you gave examples the engine can't handle anymore? Wouldn't that suck if you weren't be able to get into the zone and because you guys hate instances so much cryptic refuses to make an instance of that zone to let you into?

Very few games cap zones anymore (although Mythic is doing it in Warhammer) ... they let the lag naturally limit the number of players in the zone.

And that's not something I've ever denied. But if you think just because there's going to be instancing, there's not going to be lag ... hmmm, I think you're in for a disappointment. I haven't seen an instanced game yet, that still didn't have its lag problems.

[Loekii]

I actually heard that they had 300 in beta and scaled it back because testers felt it was overcrowding (too many players in one place).

[Mozcol]

If that is the case, then yes, its a questionable set up.

However, as CO demonstrated, that is not a limitation of the instance system, but rather a limitation in the design choice.

Now, I do not think that will be the case, and I expect that there will be areas of 3D space, where we will be crossing paths with other players -- ie flying through an asteroid belt hunting pirate raiders, while other players are mining that belt, while others are heading to the small research station on one of the asteriods, and others are heading towards the planet, etc.


I don't want that to be the case either but he just so clear in that vid its hard to think there will be anything of what your explaining. The Galaxy map is where you see some players and mobs that you drop out of into an instance to engage, other than that the Galaxy map is a travel screen. Starbases are the only other social hub (or social interaction), he mentions Risa but that was in reaction to the question about getting a drink and the speaker said that was a part of a quest. At this point, all info (and solid info at that) is to lack of interaction in STO, I can only pray that they do a 180 on us and show us otherwise.


Edit: However, he did say that there would be server wide Borg Attacks that would prompt an interaction of many seeing that they will entering the same instance. Just how many of those can presumably be in less to almost none.

[Piotrek]

Actually i already knew of the 200 player limit, i was just using that as example in order to gauge your definition of massive. It succeeded with you showing you having pessimism on the engine in general and not specifically instances. You mentioned the 200 limit, this limit would be the case if they had instances or only one instance of that zone because as you said it can't go over that without severe lag. Having multiple servers with no instances doesn't magically increase the amount of people allowed in the zone without severe lag past a certain limit, the limits of the engine will always be the same. If you propose they just only have one instance but allow more than 200 and just live with the lag, they could do the same with instances by improving the player cap.

How would it be any more massive if they had multiple servers but a limit of 200 players per zone as you gave examples the engine can't handle anymore? Wouldn't that suck if you weren't be able to get into the zone and because you guys hate instances so much cryptic refuses to make an instance of that zone to let you into?

Well i can answer that for you very easily. Make the system just like EVE online, where each solar system is run on its own couple of server, or in case of jita spanned over a lot of servers, take away any cap limits on pops just like in eve or in SWG. In swg can you imagine how epic fail the game would be if you could only have 200 people on a planet at any given time compared to the thousands of players that were on the planets at a given time!!! Also can you imagine how bad the player economy would be if all the crafters chose to only be on a certain instance and sell products in a certain instance and not in any other, you could not have galaxy wide bazaars search for products unless they made it so you can see all products sold or auctioned. Prices would fluctuate by a ton too, but then again STO crafting will probably be nothing more then crafting a few med packs and rifles for your toons. Im pretty sure any crafter types will not be joining this game cause looking at CO its already failed them in that perspective.

Unfortunately as i mentioned before this would mean that the developers of this game have some talent in creating a quality net code, and also be able to support the server infrastructure needed to run the game properly. All you need to do is set up servers to handle certain areas with some servers as backups to span with a server that needs help at a point where the population starts to get to big. It really quite simple from a design stand point, you just need developers willing to do it. But since they are stuck in their CO engine with its limitations they don't want to.

[Suraknar]

The major difference between STO's server setup and CO's is that CO had numerous zones, each of which was sharded, STO will have only 1 zone, also called the Galaxy map. This Galaxy map will also be sharded, for instance, when you leave Starbase 1 shard 3, you will also have to select a Galaxy map shard from a list (or have it autoselect for you).

I don;t think the Starbase 1 sharding is the real issue, but rather the sharding of the overall map, the Galaxy map.

There will be no persistant, player influenced changes to the game. All this talk about areas of the neutral zone changing hands, all this competitve PvE... how can it work in a sharded universe? What my fleet achieves in shard 4 won't appear in shard 8.

This is what Cryptic have chosen to scrap, in favour of a simplistic, scripted universe. What has yet to be seen, is if all this talk of 'fun' will keep people glued to the screen playing STO, because I can you all something, the endless customisation, the episodic missions and the endless wonders of the Genesis system most CERTAINLY will not.

Oh wow...I been away for a while, this seems to be quite a disappointing devellopment of how the Universe is setup (could appreciate some links to the actual news describing this).

This is like Tabula Rasa, and that was not fun there either. Taking or Defending bases in one world Instance but not in the other gave a very very artificial feeling to all of the game...immersion went *poof* bye bye...

I can Understand that the game may use Mission Instancing for groups, because well, it would just be ridiculous if you were sent on a First Contact mission on a Given Planet and there were 10 other Captains with their grouped running around on the same planet.

Plus well, lets not forget that they are trying to remain loyal to the experience of Star Trek's Away mission...again it would not be Star Trek Experience accurate, if you are following a plot line that brings you to an unexplored Planet only to see another 10 captains and their groups running around in the same planet...it is no longer "unnexplored"...

However, that being said....the Universe itself...being instanced...I am skeptical...the positives just do not outweigh the negatives...

This is sad news..

[Zepath]

You won't see 10 other Captains at an unexplored planet ... for all out debate on what we like and don't like, I don't think anyone is worried about that.

[Mozcol]

Oh wow...I been away for a while, this seems to be quite a disappointing devellopment of how the Universe is setup (could appreciate some links to the actual news describing this).

This is like Tabula Rasa, and that was not fun there either. Taking or Defending bases in one world Instance but not in the other gave a very very artificial feeling to all of the game...immersion went *poof* bye bye...

I can Understand that the game may use Mission Instancing for groups, because well, it would just be ridiculous if you were sent on a First Contact mission on a Given Planet and there were 10 other Captains with their grouped running around on the same planet.

Plus well, lets not forget that they are trying to remain loyal to the experience of Star Trek's Away mission...again it would not be Star Trek Experience accurate, if you are following a plot line that brings you to an unexplored Planet only to see another 10 captains and their groups running around in the same planet...it is no longer "unnexplored"...

However, that being said....the Universe itself...being instanced...I am skeptical...the positives just do not outweigh the negatives...

This is sad news..

http://www.tentonhammer.com/node/73301 All the vids are here, check them out.......vid 4 is where you here about the lack of interaction......made me shudder.

[Rebel230]

I am enjoying my champions headstart, I am not bashing the game, so far its alot of fun, reminds me of when I 1st played CoH/ CoV. The shard system to me is a terrible idea, unless theres a better way to implement it. Im in a group, we zone, were in different shards, wth?

I thought STO was going to be like EvE 1 server, no shards? Thats the only real way to make an empire spanning space based game properly. Massive space battles wont be happening with 24 people in an entire shard, what a joke, hey Im being attacked come help, oh Id love to help but the shards full, isnt that tech like ancient?

I dont know Im ranting because Im ****ed, I was there when Jack said they have the tech to EASILY have everyone on 1 server at same time, unless the game did like wow populations, if its with shards go to servers. Shards suck.

[Zepath]

While I'm in your camp ... there's 3 other active threads about this. :)

[Hornet331]

thread one thoused three hundred twenty two on that topic,,,,

[KO_Gilligan]

I am enjoying my champions headstart, I am not bashing the game, so far its alot of fun, reminds me of when I 1st played CoH/ CoV. The shard system to me is a terrible idea, unless theres a better way to implement it. Im in a group, we zone, were in different shards, wth?

I thought STO was going to be like EvE 1 server, no shards? Thats the only real way to make an empire spanning space based game properly. Massive space battles wont be happening with 24 people in an entire shard, what a joke, hey Im being attacked come help, oh Id love to help but the shards full, isnt that tech like ancient?

I dont know Im ranting because Im ****ed, I was there when Jack said they have the tech to EASILY have everyone on 1 server at same time, unless the game did like wow populations, if its with shards go to servers. Shards suck.

Don't games that run one persistant world on one server have horrible clustering in popular areas - and are limited to smaller, less busy maps?

In any event, it's not 24, last week CO was running over 150, and I think the per shard number can grow significantly as players spread out better. They are currently clustering the early missions of huge maps

[ibby1kanobi]

I'm checking on this now, but from a technology standpoint, it wouldn't be feasible to have thousands of players on the galaxy map.

Really, the game works like I described it above. Different maps have different population limits, and you can move between different instances of the maps as you like to group up with other people as you desire.


EvE online has a single server with once instance of it. With thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of players. Technologically it has been done and is feasible. We don't need to "see" everyone on the galactic map, but we also don't need a thousand shards on one server.

Out of all the things I disagree with about the development of the game, this has got to be it. ST is about a single universe with everyone living and sharing in it. Shards are outdated.

[ibby1kanobi]

You won't see 10 other Captains at an unexplored planet ... for all out debate on what we like and don't like, I don't think anyone is worried about that.

You WOULD if you were at a planet 2 hops away from Earth. You WON'T once everyone goes a different direction in the vast universe. There are just too many directions one can explore after hitting a certain distance that you won't see anyone.

What if someone discovers something on one shard....does it effect the shard you're in? Can you still be considered the "first" to discover and make contact? I think that diminishes the other guys achievement.

It's just not proper "ST" lore.

[Interdictor]

Considering that there could still be up to 200 or so people in one social area, that's stil plenty - up to 40 full teams/fleets of 5. (assuming they keep similar CO numbers of course - could even be higher if the gfx lag isn't as bad in STO - it may more horsepower to generate a cityscape like Millenium City than it does open space)

[Suraknar]

You won't see 10 other Captains at an unexplored planet ... for all out debate on what we like and don't like, I don't think anyone is worried about that.

I only mentioned "Mission Instancing" to differentiate it from "galaxy Instancing".

I understand it is just a question of Terminology, albeit I did not read all of the thread replies, some refer to Instances and some some to Shards.

And I found it necessary to make a clear distinction... A Shard refers to a separate Server...and the term was actually coined with Ultima Online (my first MMORPG), as it went with its Lore of the Gem of immortality being Shattered in to multiple "Shards", which in reality were the various servers of that very wonderful game.

And each Shard(server), had its own history and evolution, people and events.

So when we say shards we are referring to a multiple Server implementation, where each server is a distinct and separate entity from another.

This is not what STO is doing however right?

STO is making multiple copies, aka instances of the same galaxy all superimposed on top of one another.

Like Galaxy 1, galaxy 2, galaxy 3 galaxy 4....etc...all being connected (permitting thus the illusion of one Connection point, or one Huge server, but that is not Seamless and is instead compartmentalized).

So a Player could be in Sol System of Galaxy 1 and another of their buddies in Sol System of Galaxy 5, and still be able to communicate and decide to meet eachother. Right?

This is How Tabula Rasa worked too..and frankly that destroys immersion.

There is a difference between speaking to your friend and that is somewhere in the galaxy and they respond with "I am now in sector grid b2, it will take me that much time to warp to your location"...and "I am in Sol system just like you only in a different (galaxy) instance than you"

To say nothing about the PvP part of the game (if it really has a meaningfull one), Objective/Planet A if in federation hands in galaxy Instance 1 but it is in Klingon Hands in Galaxy Instance 2...it would not have mattered if Galaxy 1 and Galaxy 2 are actually separate Shards without connection between them..but if these are like Tabula Rasa (game failed btw) and connected, it just is silly.... but that point has been made in the thread.

http://www.tentonhammer.com/node/73301 All the vids are here, check them out.......vid 4 is where you here about the lack of interaction......made me shudder.

Thank you for the link i will watch now! :)

[Drexxus3d]

Even EVE online, which is one massively persistent universe, has a limit for the number of players that can be in a single area in space. When I flew with goonswarm we hit it several times, we also had some battles so massive it lagged the region and crashed it multiple times.

I'm fine with restrictions as long as it preserves gameplay, but its got to allow for at least 200 people per area I think.

[jdnix]

EvE online has a single server with once instance of it. With thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of players. Technologically it has been done and is feasible. We don't need to "see" everyone on the galactic map, but we also don't need a thousand shards on one server.

Out of all the things I disagree with about the development of the game, this has got to be it. ST is about a single universe with everyone living and sharing in it. Shards are outdated.

I for one don't want STO reduced to the crappy game play of EVE. I want ship customization. I want ship facing to matter in combat rather than being a graphical effect with no gameplay significance. I want environments more detailed than a static background. I want the STO developers doing more than optimizing server performance which is what the EVE developers seem to spend most of their time doing.

The single server nature of EVE of is remarkable, but they've had to sacrifice virtually every other hallmark of a good game to get there. They can't have the complexity and speed of STO game play, because it would bring their vaunted single server to it's knees. Every ship in STO is probably requires a hundred times the information that an EVE ship does.

It works for their resource based PVP game, but for a PVE game it would be a step back into the stone ages of Everquest.

[Rota]

hey Im being attacked come help, oh Id love to help but the shards full, isnt that tech like ancient?


I heard we can move to a different shard in the middle of a zone. Could we just zone to another shard in the middle of combat to avoid a loss? That doesn't seem fair.

OK. let's lock a player from moving shards when they aren't at a zone point. ...if they are in combat


But also if there is a limit to the capacity of a zone, a fleet could plan ahead and on a weekend just fill up 80-90% full of their own ships. So a small federation group saunters through the zone and as soon as they get to the middle of nowhere in the zone, my Klingon fleet de-cloaks and utterly destroys them with 10-1 numbers. They call to every friend that they are getting ganked and need help, but noone can come because the shard is "full". That doesn't seem fair either.

So what do we do?

[KO_Gilligan]

Considering that there could still be up to 200 or so people in one social area, that's stil plenty - up to 40 full teams/fleets of 5. (assuming they keep similar CO numbers of course - could even be higher if the gfx lag isn't as bad in STO - it may more horsepower to generate a cityscape like Millenium City than it does open space)

Also with that many, if you call a friend to join a full shard, there's typically someone entering a powerhouse, instance, or helicopter, at that very moment, you certainly don't have to wait long... you aren't locked out since people are stepping out continually.

[Lt-Baba_Booey]

But also if there is a limit to the capacity of a zone, a fleet could plan ahead and on a weekend just fill up 80-90% full of their own ships. So a small federation group saunters through the zone and as soon as they get to the middle of nowhere in the zone, my Klingon fleet de-cloaks and utterly destroys them with 10-1 numbers. They call to every friend that they are getting ganked and need help, but noone can come because the shard is "full". That doesn't seem fair either.

So what do we do?

Possibly limit the number of each faction?
Like if the shard limit is 300, that would allow 150 feds and 150 klingons? could that work?

[Loekii]

Possibly limit the number of each faction?
Like if the shard limit is 300, that would allow 150 feds and 150 klingons? could that work?

While I think that is a smart approach, I disagree with its use in STO, because of the nature of combat.

It is not a 1:1 ratio, but rather you may have ships from all sorts of tiers, and lower tiers make up their weakness by numbers.

Imo, I think the solution is simply avoiding that zone and sending the word out. If a guild has decided to be chickens and exploit the population cap, then just let them sit in that zone empty -- as everyone else goes to one of the other instances, and avoids them. Sort of hard to gank and ambush, when prey simply avoids your 'trap'.

That actually demonstrates one of the positives of the system. If one zone is being exploited like this, you can just go to another copy of the zone and continue to play the game properly.

[Piotrek]

While I think that is a smart approach, I disagree with its use in STO, because of the nature of combat.

It is not a 1:1 ratio, but rather you may have ships from all sorts of tiers, and lower tiers make up their weakness by numbers.

Imo, I think the solution is simply avoiding that zone and sending the word out. If a guild has decided to be chickens and exploit the population cap, then just let them sit in that zone empty -- as everyone else goes to one of the other instances, and avoids them. Sort of hard to gank and ambush, when prey simply avoids your 'trap'.

That actually demonstrates one of the positives of the system. If one zone is being exploited like this, you can just go to another copy of the zone and continue to play the game properly.


Positive and major downfalls from a pvp perspective. WAR IS NOT FAIR! If you cant hack it never come into the pvp areas.

Another point too, sometimes the underdogs only have the number advantage if they are against a group thats bigger and better equiped.

[KO_Gilligan]

the devs are certainly taking the PvP teaming to the limits as it is currently, I would assume there is a simple answer regarding how the battles play out.

[dinendae]

EvE online has a single server with once instance of it. With thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of players. Technologically it has been done and is feasible. We don't need to "see" everyone on the galactic map, but we also don't need a thousand shards on one server.

Yes and no: While everyone in Eve plays in the same 'single server,' it is actually more of a server cluster than an actual single server. Each system in that game is its own zone, and the zones are assigned to servers; you are more than likely playing on a different server when starting out an Amarr character versus a Caldari character. While Eve doesn't use instancing, its playerbase is more spread out over hundreds (or more) systems since the game has been out for years now. Also add in the fact that Eve's population expanded gradually over time, helping to spread the playerbase out.

Any game that launches now and goes for a 'single server' setup, needs to have something in place to deal with a large influx of players all sharing the same areas. While I'm not particularly a fan of instancing, I can accept it as long as it is done well; the starting areas should have a lower population cap if most of the players will be going after the same mobs/items/etc., while other areas should have higher population caps. No instance should ever be locked out to a player to join, to help players meet with friends, and population limits need to be balanced between allowing as many people as possible in post-starting zones versus keeping population induced lag to a minimum. Finally, there should be a mechanic in place to allow players or groups to switch instances without having to log out or zone to another area. PvP areas should operate slightly differently in regards to instance switching to keep people from engaging in PvP and then instantly switching to another instance when they start losing a battle. Perhaps having a combat flag; when engaged in combat, the system temporarily disables the ability to switch instances.

[Piotrek]

I for one don't want STO reduced to the crappy game play of EVE. I want ship customization. I want ship facing to matter in combat rather than being a graphical effect with no gameplay significance. I want environments more detailed than a static background. I want the STO developers doing more than optimizing server performance which is what the EVE developers seem to spend most of their time doing.

The single server nature of EVE of is remarkable, but they've had to sacrifice virtually every other hallmark of a good game to get there. They can't have the complexity and speed of STO game play, because it would bring their vaunted single server to it's knees. Every ship in STO is probably requires a hundred times the information that an EVE ship does.

It works for their resource based PVP game, but for a PVE game it would be a step back into the stone ages of Everquest.

Wow you really think you know the game huh, for one i can tell you that all your customization in this game is nothing but a pretty shell it offers no significance of any sort. Also EVE has a ton of ship customization when it comes to equipment and ship setup. You can have thousands of ship setups just for one ship.

Eve team works on development and addition of new features constantly, their combat model is pretty solid, so the one thing they dont have is facing boohoo. They work on server enhancement cause that is what people want along with their MANY MANY free expansions that come out regular with tons of new ships and features to the game. Seems like your probably a WOW gamer that does not know what time investment and complexity in a game really are. Stick to your simply play style, but if you think this game looks like it will be more complex man is that a joke, i hope i am incorrect on this but i doubt it. This game is made for the simpletons that like CO and WOW, not for the more hardcore gamer that enjoys difficulty and complexity in a game. Nothing in this game looks complex. I can probably play it like i did wow in my sleep cause it was that easy to level and carry out quests.

BTW i no longer play eve and will not, till they add what i have been asking for a long time, a capital mining ship (i been playing the game since closed beta). So please none of that well if you don't like it go play EVE, cause im using my comments to hopefully get some response from the DEVS team like some others on these forums to see the errors of their ways and change some of their choices.

[Loekii]

Finally, there should be a mechanic in place to allow players or groups to switch instances without having to log out or zone to another area.

In CO, you can basically switch to an different instance number from a button on the Mini-Map in the UI -- no need to leave the 'zone' and then re-enter the 'zone'. Its basically a direct 'teleport/transfer'.

PvP areas should operate slightly differently in regards to instance switching to keep people from engaging in PvP and then instantly switching to another instance when they start losing a battle. Perhaps having a combat flag; when engaged in combat, the system temporarily disables the ability to switch instances.

Craig/Zinc said that you cannot go to warp while in combat -- you basically will have to disengage (get far enough away from the battle before you can warp out). It sounds sort of like the PotBS system. Now, if someone is actively perusing you, odds are you will never get out of combat, nor far enough away to jump to warp.

I would imagine this restriction will apply to switching instance numbers as well, requiring that you are 'Out of Combat' to transfer.

In CO, I think you are likewise prevented from switching if you are in combat.

[Rota]

well let's say the capacity of a shard is 300

maybe they could limit it to 200 of a given faction. That way if it's full then theres no way to get more than a 2-1 ratio

this does not remove the possibility of large fleets outnumbering smaller ones enormously. but only if the shard isn't "full". Thus reinforcements can be called for and there's room for them to fit in

[Loekii]

well let's say the capacity of a shard is 300

maybe they could limit it to 200 of a given faction. That way if it's full then theres no way to get more than a 2-1 ratio

this does not remove the possibility of large fleets outnumbering smaller ones enormously. but only if the shard isn't "full". Thus reinforcements can be called for and there's room for them to fit in

That might be a better approach.

[Rota]

In CO, I think you are likewise prevented from switching if you are in combat.

You are locked from zoning totally? Or just from switching the shard of your current zone?

I sure as heck hope people are allowed to run away. It would suck to get to the zone wall and suddenly be trapped between a battlecruiser and a programming wall

[Interdictor]

I heard we can move to a different shard in the middle of a zone. Could we just zone to another shard in the middle of combat to avoid a loss? That doesn't seem fair.
I imagine the devs will have a system in place to prevent this. This would be just too easily exploitable.

But also if there is a limit to the capacity of a zone, a fleet could plan ahead and on a weekend just fill up 80-90% full of their own ships. So a small federation group saunters through the zone and as soon as they get to the middle of nowhere in the zone, my Klingon fleet de-cloaks and utterly destroys them with 10-1 numbers. They call to every friend that they are getting ganked and need help, but noone can come because the shard is "full". That doesn't seem fair either.

So what do we do?
Simply switch to another shard of the zone. People will eventually get the drift and the klingon fleet in question will be spending a lot of time hanging out in the shard singing kumbaya and playing bumpercars with their ships. It wouldn't be very fun for them either.

[Galv]

I wouldn't be suprised if Cryptic handled the pvp/fvf instances as with POTBS. I really can't see them having pvp zones/instances with 40 or more players, i'm guessing the number will be a lot lower maybe 8v8 would be closer in a private instanced battle.

[Suraknar]

Oh...speaking of walls...I really hope there aren't Invisible walls in space our ship can hit...

The moment my Ships hits a wall like that, I am out of this game, as it would be really pseudo space.

I am trying already to come to terms with the Instancing approach...and say to myself "ok STO will not feature an Immersive Star Trek Universe"....and take some consolation that it has other strong features...but please don;t tell me there will be invisible walls too now...

[Interdictor]

I wouldn't be suprised if Cryptic handled the pvp/fvf instances as with POTBS. I really can't see them having pvp zones/instances with 40 or more players, i'm guessing the number will be a lot lower maybe 8v8 would be closer in a private instanced battle.

I dunno - according to THIS VIDEO (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrZD1QYzhCs) at around 4:20, there can be a LOT of ships in combat at once. I'm not sure if it's PvE or PvP footage though.

[Galv]

I dunno - according to THIS VIDEO (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrZD1QYzhCs) at around 4:20, there can be a LOT of ships in combat at once. I'm not sure if it's PvE or PvP footage though.

Yea i noiced that, i would guess that would be a PVE battle, i don't know much on the tech side of things, but i would imagine that number ships in a pvp instance would cause a lot of slow down and lag.

[CaptainFreeFall]

I think the bottom line is; Its their engine they arnt going to drop it, and theres nothing you can do about it.

[Rivaris]

hopefully the pvp zones like the neutral zone will have a big server network giong on so there could be at least 500 peeps in 1 zone at a time

[Zepath]

Don't games that run one persistant world on one server have horrible clustering in popular areas - and are limited to smaller, less busy maps?

In any event, it's not 24, last week CO was running over 150, and I think the per shard number can grow significantly as players spread out better. They are currently clustering the early missions of huge maps

Not really Gilligan ... I mean technology alone dictates there there be some kind of limit ... but as I've said before, most these game allow the players themselves to manage the cap .... based off of people leaving.

I don't know what the localized cap is for WoW ... I know that I've been on raids to the Undercity were there were a dozen or more Alliance guilds ... with from 50 to 150 players .... and then you have to add the horde defenders (they always knew we were coming when we'd put together that many). And the lag did start until all the fighting moved to the core of the city. Sometimes it was insignificant lag, other times is was bad.

So what ... 1000 or 1200 players in an a local area? WoW won't ever tell us.

[Kwiat]

I thought STO was going to be like EvE 1 server, no shards? Thats the only real way to make an empire spanning space based game properly. Massive space battles wont be happening with 24 people in an entire shard, what a joke, hey Im being attacked come help, oh Id love to help but the shards full, isnt that tech like ancient?

I'm wondering what makes this technology ancient or, how others have called it, out of date? Clearly it cannot be older than mmo themselves, so how it can be ok to play mmo, but for mmo to use shards it's out of date? Who is entitled to decide this?

[Rota]

hopefully the pvp zones like the neutral zone will have a big server network giong on so there could be at least 500 peeps in 1 zone at a time

well i hope the NZ is just so vast that it never has to get sharded. I'm hoping it can handle battles as large as EvE if not bigger.
I hope sharding is only for hubs like DS9 where the physical size of the station is a limiting factor, not the server capacity.

[Z3r0Fear]

I'm really hoping there are no invisible walls because that will ruin everything and make it very easy to corner people in pvp.

[Mozcol]

If there were several servers like other MMO's I would expect that STO's single server would be able to handle a population load per area in the same manner as that "one of" server in other MMO's. If not then STO is taking the wrong direction with this single server approach.

[eqfan592]

"ok STO will not feature an Immersive Star Trek Universe"....and take some consolation that it has other strong features...but please don;t tell me there will be invisible walls too now...

I couldn't disagree more with this mentality. I honestly think anybody who honestly feels that instancing ruins immersion simply didn't spend enough time in other MMO's that don't have instancing to really experience what over-crowding can do to a game. Nor did they deal with the idea of having to switch servers if you wanted to play with friends enough either. And what stuns me is that you've played MMO's all the way back to UO. Jesus, the over-crowding issues there are a thing of legends.

[Zepath]

well i hope the NZ is just so vast that it never has to get sharded. I'm hoping it can handle battles as large as EvE if not bigger.
I hope sharding is only for hubs like DS9 where the physical size of the station is a limiting factor, not the server capacity.

Well, we were just talking over in the other thread ... who says the NZ is even accessable from the PvE zone?

It could be that "the Neutral Zone" is just the name they use for their battlegrounds, and the only way you'll be able to get into will be through a queue.

Think about it ... (while we're not positive) we know of no area in CO that is directly accessable from the PvE areas, without going through a queue. And its the same engine. :)

You can be sue that the PvE missions will be instanced so the carebears don't have to risk being engaged by a PC.

[Suraknar]

I think someone is Playing with Terminology here.

Will STO be 1 Server with instanced layers of the world?

Example: Sol System 1, Sol System 2, Sol System 3 ...10 all in one server (We all know it is always clusters of servers hardware wise)...where players could go play in Sol 1 or Sol 5 at the same time and people can communicate with eachother from different instances of Sol x ?

Or,

is the game going to have SHARDS...like WoW or UO or EQ, which are Servers containing 1 Copy of the Universe each (yes in reality hardware wise it is clusters of mashines). But each shard is Distinct from another.

And a Player could have a Character in one shard and another character with same name in another Shard?

Shard=Server.


---

I would not mind multiple distinct Shards/Servers...as I do not think they can make it all 1 Seamless Server like EVE...but I would mind a 1 Server with multiple Copies of Sol in it....it makes the game's world so artificial... Tabula Rasa (a game that died), had Instanced world too.

---

But please let me understand, I watched the Videos from Ten Ton Hammer and Galaxy Instances are not being mentioned, I actually Liked the Warp Mode...

I did understand that Solar Systems are multiple Zones too...and I am expecting Mission to be Instanced as well, so if Player A takes quest/mission A to beam down on Vulcan and Player B takes the same Quest/mission they will both beam down to their own Vulcan instance to accomplish the mission/quest individually, this part is fine as well.

But when they both go back in to Vulcan space, I hope there is only one Copy of Vulcan space and not Multiple Vulcan Areas....

Thanks for clarifications.

[Zepath]

I would not mind multiple distinct Shards/Servers...as I do not think they can make it all 1 Seamless Server like EVE...but I would mind a 1 Server with multiple Copies of Sol in it....it makes the game's world so artificial... Tabula Rasa (a game that died), had Instanced world too.


If they do what they are doing in CO (and they are using the same engine) ... there will be multiple copies (instances) of the Sol system, yes.

[Hornet331]

well i hope the NZ is just so vast that it never has to get sharded. I'm hoping it can handle battles as large as EvE if not bigger.
I hope sharding is only for hubs like DS9 where the physical size of the station is a limiting factor, not the server capacity.

ble tbh im not a bif fan of blobbing... especial in eve, it involves no tactic, just big pewpew and nothing more. Best battles are small battels with not more then 20-30 ships involved. :)

[Piotrek]

I couldn't disagree more with this mentality. I honestly think anybody who honestly feels that instancing ruins immersion simply didn't spend enough time in other MMO's that don't have instancing to really experience what over-crowding can do to a game. Nor did they deal with the idea of having to switch servers if you wanted to play with friends enough either. And what stuns me is that you've played MMO's all the way back to UO. Jesus, the over-crowding issues there are a thing of legends.

Aah i probably played 2 times realistically the number of MMO's you played and can still say instancing is garbage for noob developers with no skills. When we are talking a UNIVERSE this LARGE to instance it, is just a crime against the star trek IP.

I said it before and will say it again i would not be against cryptic going bankrupt or losing their IP rights and another more experienced company or group take over it. Even if it would take another 2-3 years i would rather this game get done right, then be a quick way to rip off all the star trek fans with their initial purchase of this game and find out a month or two down the road this game has no real creativity behind it.

[Suraknar]

If they do what they are doing in CO (and they are using the same engine) ... there will be multiple copies (instances) of the Sol system, yes.

Ok thank you, haven't played CO, don't intend to either, looks too much PVE for my taste, plus I just don't relate I guess to the super hero stuff.

But I appreciate your answer :)

I believe the only reason why they are going this way is most probably the expected popularity of STO. EVE only has 50k tops players playing at the same time...even if it has 500k subscribed accounts.

Day one for STO it could very well have 200k concurrent players, and I would not be surprised if a million copies sell the first month.

So there is really only one technical solution with two implementation options, solutions for these numbers, either to make Shards (servers), like UO, EQ, SWG, WoW and many others...or to do Instances like they are doing...(which technically would be like you took all of the shards/servers and connected them together)...to permit 1 million subscribers to reside in the "same server".

I am really skeptical about the instanced approach I hope to get the opportunity to experience this hands on in beta. We shall see.

Thanks again for the clarification!

[rogerwroten]

Here is a thought... Ever wonder how many subs Cryptic is hoping to get? I would love to see this game with a few million subs with 1 or 2 million online at one time. Can you imagine the number of shards popular places would have?

[Zepath]

Well, if AoC can sell a million boxes, and get 800K subscribers at launch ... I would expect that STO can do at least that.

I've said from day one this game will be successful and make it, even if it were the worse MMO ever written ... there's just too many hardcore trekkies out there that are desparate for ANYTHING.

By the way ... box sales never equals your subscriptions at launch, because box sales includes those boxes sold to sit on the shelf over time ... and usually, after a free month is up, those that have found the game isn't their cup of tea, start to leave ... the goal is to attract new players at a rate faster than the natural attrition ... it seldom happens, but that's the goal.