+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery General (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Discovery RP 24/7 General Discussions (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=23)
+--- Thread: Question - which POBs exactly are the problem ones (/showthread.php?tid=111229)
Pages:
1
2
Question - which POBs exactly are the problem ones - Tunicle - 02-01-2014
Virtually every other post is about POBs and the same point keeps appearing, problem POBs that destroy the RP.
How many of these exist and which are they?
RE: Question - which POBs exactly are the problem ones - Jack_Henderson - 02-01-2014
Easy: All blocking bases.
There are... less than 5 these days, I think.
RE: Question - which POBs exactly are the problem ones - Tunicle - 02-01-2014
(02-01-2014, 02:19 AM)Jack_Henderson Wrote: Easy: All blocking bases.
So is it all blocking bases or are sensible RP blocking allowed?
Or does RP not work with bases?
RE: Question - which POBs exactly are the problem ones - Echo 7-7 - 02-01-2014
I personally feel that Melbourne Station, while it is a "blocking" base, at least has a very legitimate purpose. Zone-21 has always been a well-defended area inrp, and players chose to escalate its actual gameplay defenses in order to match the presence of capital ships and large transports that would otherwise survive the static or NPC defenses.
RE: Question - which POBs exactly are the problem ones - Papa Oomaumau - 02-01-2014
Server stability (and specifically its ability to handle capspam/furrballs) dropped markedly with the re-institution of POBs.
The reason for this is the fact that POBs, unlike static bases and planets, constantly run fairly complicated script - consuming resources, generating shields and powering/aiming weapon platforms, allowing and disallowing player docking, maintaining and calculating limited items/commodities, among other things.
This adds to the script-load while also being layered onto a very old vanilla script, which is admittedly antiquated at its root.
Long way of saying; Pretty much all of them.
Players may have individual qualms about individual bases - some will rage against, and some will defend every base mentioned here.
I prefer a larger blanket - one not based on any sense of loyalty or factionhate.
RE: Question - which POBs exactly are the problem ones - onca - 02-01-2014
(02-01-2014, 03:12 AM)Papa Oomaumau Wrote: Server stability (and specifically its ability to handle capspam/furrballs) dropped markedly with the re-institution of POBs.
The reason for this is the fact that POBs, unlike static bases and planets, constantly run fairly complicated script - consuming resources, generating shields and powering/aiming weapon platforms, allowing and disallowing player docking, maintaining and calculating limited items/commodities, among other things.
This adds to the script-load while also being layered onto a very old vanilla script, which is admittedly antiquated at its root.
^^ This
I was horrified by the server lag whilst playing since POBs were re-enabled. NPCs are all over the place, and docking with a base/gate takes several seconds to kick in. My ping is around 330, the same it's been for years, but lag is much degraded.
Besides that, there are more POBs on the server than online players. I'd love to know how they all get resupplied.
POBs are a great idea, but in all honesty, it's just too taxing for an 11-yo single-threaded engine running on even the best rig.
EDIT: My apologies, I just found out the server has been under DOD attacks. That's undoubtedly the reason for severe lagging. Damn hackers, someone should blow their basements up >
RE: Question - which POBs exactly are the problem ones - Vipera Berus - 02-01-2014
There is 2 blocking bases I can recollect off the top of my head and nether are a particular problem. One is the Liberty lawful base at zone 21 Melbourne or something the other is kings cross station. Both from what I recall can be avoided fairly easily by the simple expedient of taking a different route. The reason players complain is the "Why do I have to make the extra effort" mentality.
RE: Question - which POBs exactly are the problem ones - Haste - 02-01-2014
(02-01-2014, 03:12 AM)Papa Oomaumau Wrote: Server stability (and specifically its ability to handle capspam/furrballs) dropped markedly with the re-institution of POBs.
Remember .86?
Remember 200+ population while the PoB plugin was active?
Remember that it actually wasn't even as laggy as .87 was prior to bases being re-enabled?
Yeah. It's a cool story, and I'm sure the PoB plugin is a performance hog, but knowing that the server used to be able to support Raptor's RNC- raids into Texas with 15 versus 15 cap+snub brawls AND have PoBs on and still not lag as badly as the server does nowadays.. It can't exactly be the main, or only, cause.
RE: Question - which POBs exactly are the problem ones - Curios - 02-01-2014
(02-01-2014, 01:28 PM)Haste Wrote: Remember .86?
Remember 200+ population while the PoB plugin was active?
I don't remember 8|
RE: Question - which POBs exactly are the problem ones - Zen_Mechanics - 02-01-2014
Bases have a performance impact, but performance doesn't always mean lag. Bases do not cause the horrific lags we currently have, and if they do - its the devs fault, for whatever they did with it. I remember exactly as haste has said, more stations, more players, no lag.