Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'server'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Forum Rules & Announcements
    • Forum Rules & Guidelines
    • Announcements
    • Patch Notes
  • New Player Landing Zone
    • New Player Help
    • FAQ & Information Desk
    • Gameplay Tutorials
    • Player Introductions
  • General (EN)
    • General Discussions
    • Lua Forum
    • Builder Forum
    • Industry Forum
    • PvP Forum
    • Public Test Server Feedback
    • The Gameplay Mechanics Assembly
    • Idea Box
    • Off Topic Discussions
  • General (DE)
    • Allgemeine Diskussionen
  • General (FR)
    • Discussions générales
  • Social Corner
    • Org Updates & Announcements
    • Roleplay & Lore
    • Fan Art

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL









Found 11 results

  1. Entities will become a problem in this game, I am not talking about derelict ships, I am talking about factories, refineries, as the game progress and more things are added another Machine Factory will be needed, a new ore will mean another Refinery. Each container is limited to 9 links, and as you build out it is quickly found that it becomes increasingly more difficult to consolidate things if not impossible. So as the Organizations grow the need for larger Refinery/Factory Bases will become a thing, the amount of links needed will increase exponentially and all of this causes stress on the server(s) which is already maintaining a gargantuan flow of data of terrain changes. I purpose that there are several options to consider to reduce the amount of entities/links that are needed to maintain a function operation. #1 Introduce levels of the industry machines being used already that are capable of running multiple recipes at the same time (even if it is the same recipe do not reduce the time it takes to make things) - Example - Refinery (acts as it does) - Uncommon Refinery(the ability to run 2 recipes) - Advanced Refinery (The ability to run 3 Recipes) - furthermore it would be my suggestion that the previous entity be used in the proceeding entity making it more likely for people to pick up their old machines and repurpose them. This solves two issues #1 it reduces base footprints that are needed and #2 it reduces the amount of links that the server must keep track off. This would take a full 25 Refinery base and reduce it from 25 to 9 Refineries. This also means that the links go from 50 to 18. a significant reduction. #2 Change the basics of the Transfer Node, Moving things from one crate to another is great except that your just adding links and entities, instead why not make different tiers of Transfer nodes and allow them to act like White/Black List. This has the potential to significantly reduce the amount of links in exchange for 2. #2-1 Another potential change to the Transfer Node would to be to make it a "Upgrade" to containers, making so each type of Container can accept a certain amount of "Upgrades" xs = 0 S = 2 M = 4 L = 6 and simply allow the transfer node after instillation to increase the number of links the container has IE a L with 6 transfer nodes would have 15 Links. #3. allow the Lua to Change recipes this would present more complicated coding efforts but in the end would reduce the amount of links and machines needed to run a production facility. (Not sure if people would use it but it would reduce the links) #4. On the note of planetary terrain changes, this will become one of the largest issues the servers will face, having played multiple games with the ability to change all of the terrain as I see fit this game provides the ability to do it quickly and on a large scale. With that in mind people have referred to Alioth with the following "Alioth looks like a spaghetti monster underground" not really surprising here. Now I wouldn't take away the ability to alter the terrain and dig, but mining may need a review some of the ideas I have heard are. #4-1 triangulation beacons and Drones. you would find a metal, drop a beacon go x distance in a direction and the radar would show you getting closer and when you start getting away from it you would drop another then find the other directions and each beacon would get you closer to the ore, then you would deploy a drone as you said that would "dig" down and start mining the ore. The idea would be it would take just as much time to do it by hand and the ore would be put into a "Drone Container" even add skills to increase the range so if the ore is too far down you would need more skill to get it. #4-2 Weekly Tremors that slowly restore underground tunnels to their original state (minus the ores of course) #4-2-1 a restore option on the digging tool that restores terrain to original #4-2-2 A Seismic unit that would restore a chunk to it's original state (minus the minerals) Now I understand that these ideas are not perfect and welcome open and constructive criticism. Thank you Genthro
  2. So how do we know the server status? the old link no longer works.
  3. Hi All, If I subscribe to the game can anyone tell me how often the server is online. I'm in the UK and normally play between the hours of 6pm - 10pm. Thanks in advance
  4. Hello, new here Is the game accessible from regions outside the US/Europe. I currently live in Dubai and i am aware that certain smaller startup MMO's do not provide access to players living in the Middle East. Since this is a one server universe, i'd like to know before i purchase a copy. thx
  5. I originally submitted this post to /r/DualUniverse (which you should totally check out if you frequent reddit) but considering this forum gets more attention I figured it would be best to post it here as well. So if you're a fan of MMOs or Sci-Fi games in general you probably noticed a post on /r/gaming about a possible $1,000,000 battle that was gonna go down in EVE Online. It blew up and even made national news in Canada. https://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/7sa25p/after_15_years_eve_online_is_having_its_first/ Now for those who followed the event (or if you were like me you were there personally), while it was intriguing to watch and talk about it was clear that overall it was a pretty big bust. Granted, the reddit post in question somewhat predicted this, what couldn't be predicted was all of the server issues that would plague this battle. Being that EVE is a big influencer of DU and another sandbox Sci-Fi game, I want to address some of the mechanical and server-side issues that came up and what they mean for DU. There's more reasons then just the server as to why not a whole lot happened but I really won't go into detail about them since they aren't important. This battle broke the previous record of pilots in one single system with a peak of somewhere around 6,100. That's HUGE, it may not seem like many but when you consider most modern MMO's aren't single-shard and that many games in general can't support more than 64 dudes in one instance, it's really quite impressive. Over 6,000 people in one place and as a result the server node, which was heavily reinforced by CCP, shit the the bed. So generally when a server node is under a lot of stress the game will automatically start to slow down so the server can keep up with all the calculations. This is referred to as Time Dilation, or TiDi for short. Tidi can slow down the action down to less than 10% real time which means actions can easily take 10 times longer. Once the server gets past 10% tidi it begins prioritizing certain commands over others and that's when shit starts breaking, client crashes are frequent and modules break resorting you to spamming them hoping they turn on or off accordingly. The reason the fight ended prematurely is because carriers couldn't replace lost fighters due to server lag. Needless to say, even on lowest graphics settings (which is necessary in these fights), your framerate will be awful. Still, the fact 6,000 people were in one place and the sever had to calculate all of the actions of those players and their drones/fighters and the node didn't crash is somewhat impressive. Before Tidi the server would simply crash under too much load. So I wanna raise a similar question regarding Dual Universe. Now I know the technology EVE was built on is outdated, and even tho server hardware has been upgraded over the years, the game still runs on a single core rather than multi-threading. Switching over to multi-threading would mean having to rebuild the game from the ground up. Dual Universe has the privilege of being developed today where the tech is better rather than 2003. Hell, Novaquark have even released videos displaying stress tests of how well the game handles a lot of people in one place. While impressive, it doesn't necessarily put all my doubts to rest. Calculating 1,000 people walking around in a small area isn't quite the same as 6,000 people shooting at each other among other things. It could be argued that due to EVE's focus on PvP that those sort of fights are more prone to happen in EVE than in a less PvP focused game like DU. However being that it's a sandbox title, by nature anything can happen. Players generally like to work together to forge massive empires and alliances full of thousands of people. And naturally, wars will break out because let's face it video game wars are fun. It's not unreasonable to think that a fight like this could happen in DU if the pieces fall into place. What I'm wondering is if the game can handle it, obviously we don't really know as of yet, but I think it's worth being discussed.
  6. I was wondering if it would be at all possible to make an alternate release (maybe some time after initial release) that is sort of like the structure of Minecraft, with single player survival and/or LAN co-op. I don't know much about online games, but I AM assuming that they take up a lot of space, which would be an issue, and it would probably require maximum hardware, but if it didn't hurt sales (assuming it's possible) then I would think it would at least be a good idea experimentally. If the answer is no, I am at the least anticipating some information regarding how exactly the game functions as an idea of why it wouldn't work. Thanks for any information!
  7. First off, I wanted to give my discord link, always welcome to new people: https://discordapp.com/invite/cRA2kt8 Second, can anyone leave a like on this video: https://youtu.be/IfTqJiPv25E
  8. I was walking outside tonight and I found myself looking at a plane flying across the dark sky, I wondered where the stars were and when they would come out... Then I remembered Dual Universe and how Large objects can be seen from far away. After which, I began to wonder if Dual Universe would have a Day/ Night Cycle and if night time would showcase stars if you looked up. I, for one, would love to see this happen, if it hasn't already. Also, can lights be seen from far away as well?
  9. So we have seen the planned system of having the game sub-divide a region of space based on the number of players, and this makes a lot of sense for planets and space stations, but how would this work for moving ships with large numbers of people on them? What happens if a ship gets sub-divided into multiple regions? We know the regions update slower with each other, so I imagine this could pose problems with a ship that is trying to maneuver. I'm not sure what the cut-off point is for the server to sub-divide a region of space, but I'm just going to pick and arbitrary number here for the sake of argument that the system will try to keep around 100 players per server region. It's more than reasonable that there could be ships that have more than 100 people on them, especially a year or two post-launch. Imagine a large Capital ship: the ship is going to need a crew of people to fly it, people to make emergency repairs during combat and probably a team of people to repel boarders and run the guns. And if the ship is carrying fighters then those ships will have pilots and maintenance crews, plus people to move cargo around. Add in an infantry group or non-combat personnel and the ship could easily get over 100 people. So how would the ship function if it was running on two separate machines in the server cluster?
  10. I'm a developer, you're a developer, she's probably a developer too! Let's face it, DU is born to attract the developer types to it. So let's start a (serious) wild speculation thread about what we think the back-end server architecture might look like! I have to imagine that since NQ is targeting a single-shard server structure the back-end will probably need to be broken up into micro-services. But since it is a real time game, it will also need to be as compact as possible with as few network boundaries to cross as possible. A server cluster, perhaps similar to Azure Service Fabric would do the job very well, with services partitioned out and distributed across nodes for density and automatic failover and scaling. First off, there will be a single point of contact for establishing and authenticating connections to the servers. The authentication service will check credentials and negotiation the session security keys and reserve a socket connection endpoint on the gateway layer for the client. The client will then connect to the specified endpoint with provided symmetric keys to prevent tampering. The gateway layer will be scaled as necessary to provide raw network throughput. At 5 KBps bandwidth per client, that means we get a theoretical maximum of roughly 200 clients per server until the gigabit network ports are fully saturated. Incoming packets (messages) are dropped into an event queue system for processing by the back end processing services. The regions are partitioned spatially using an octree algorithm (essentially a 3-dimensional binary search, where every cubic region of space is split in half on each dimension, into eight cubes, as necessary). The regions are separate services and are spread amongst server nodes for density and scalability. Each region is responsible for calculating physics on region objects and routing events between players in the region. A level of detail system is also in place for sending lower frequency important message across regions. As more players move into a region, the region is split cubically into sub-regions that redistribute amongst nodes in the cluster. As players leave the regions, they are collapsed back into the parent region to conserve resources. When the server cluster hits specified usage limits, additional nodes are added/removed from the cluster to scale up/down as needed. The service cluster framework (for example, Azure Service Fabric) is responsible for redistribution of partitions across server nodes and replication of services for failover purposes. Each of these scale units are also distributed geographically to maintain low latency, with a backplane in place to keep geographic regions in sync. That's my initial spitball idea for the architecture. Feel free to elaborate, correct, or share your own architecture ideas. Let's get a conversation going.
  11. Greetings. I'm fresh in after watching the gameplay video, and reading around a bit here - and digesting it for a couple of days for good measure. I'd like to share my impressions with you all, as probably everyone else does, since there's precious little else to do with this game as of yet. First off, what I liked: The scale. The sheer scale and the level of detail, with seemingly free curves, angles and block sizes, which leaves me to believe it's possible to build near-perfectly detailed smooth-surfaces, as opposed to what any other building game allows the player: Meaning, be stuck with 1 (or in an extreme case 3) meter sized blocks, and jagged slopes if you want a curve or a flat angle. That is amazing, and so is the thought of an eight kilometer long structure that doesn't wreck the game into 1FPS hell, especially since guess how long is an Imperial Retribution Class Battleship? You guessed it. Eight kilometers, plus ramming spike. And here I am stuck for the past couple of years, begrudgingly yet lovingly building a 1:7 scale bastardized mini-replica in Starmade, all the while wishing it was 1:1, better detailed, and not pixelated. However, for that to work, prefabricated blocks (a.k.a. cockpits, thrusters, weapons) NEED to change; So far the current system merely seems to be copyin what Space Engineers does, yet their method was faulty to beging with: No matter how well detailed and good looking prefabs you add to the game, and no matter how many varieties, they can't fit every design: Clearly, what tech we see now would have no place on a voidship from Warhammer: 40.000, or for that matter Stargate, Star Trek, Star Wars, or any other franchise, or any even partially talented builder's own designs. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- What NEEDS to happen, is the ability to build custom prefabs in-game, just like building the ship itself, then assigning functions to them through some menu, marking attachment and animation points, etc, so everyone can have the perfect part that perfectly fits the vessel he likes, and not just one general, bland sci-fi design! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- That one is important. If nothing else happens until release, it needs to be made a reality, unless you're fine simply aping Space Engineers. .... And with that done, we reach the cause of my wariness. The game's nature as an MMO, and it's planned payment mode-OHGODNOTANOTHERONEOFTHOSEPOSTS!!!!!!!!! Bear with me please. I'll try to make it entertaining. -MMOs lock everyone together. Smaller private servers allow for replicas of Different universes, different ways of playing, or gatherings of people with different mindsets. Lock all that together, and you unleash all the horror of every "which faction would win in a cross-franchise battle" forum flamewar ever written in the history of the internet, with all the grief attached to it. And, there'll be no way to avoid the kind of players you'd rather not mingle with; Did you spend 300 hours lovingly building a masterpiece? Tough luck when the powergamers fly in with their literally 8-polygon cubeships and manage to trash it because they didn't waste space on something as trivial as accurately replicated interiors. Does your six year old son enjoy flying the very first, and superest spaceship he ever built? It's like 20 blocks long, and looks like a clay dinosaur someone stepped on, but oh the innocent fun he's having! However, that smile will quickly turn into disappointment when cannon shells a thousand times larger than his ship start raining in from fifty-thousand meters, or just, more prosaically, encounters his first really sick griefer, (Don't get me wrong, I firmly believe we grow through pain, and no child should be pampered, but neither should we expect the little ones to face all the evils such an online community can throw at them all at once.) What I'm saying is: Smaller, dedicated servers are better, with closer communities, which in turn are closer to the people running the show, thus are better served, and better able to find a virtual home they can enjoy themselves the way they want. That was the reason against a centralized server. Now for the dirty financials: I personally think it's robbery to pay a monthly fee. I can buy the things I like, and then they'll be mine forever, or at least until they decompose. Buying a game once, then having to pay ANY fee just so I can keep accessing it is the definition of evil, and the lazy company's way of getting rich. -Some idiots who think they can act all cool and cinycal write stuff like "yeah, how dare they ask money for their product" Which is BS and makes you sound retarded. I'm perfectly fine paying for the product ONCE, as they deserve it. I'm also willing to pay for an expansion, as that has a fair amount of work put into it, and as such, has worth. What doesn't have worth, is not pulling the plug from the server, and waiting for your paycheck. -Some people say it takes money to run the servers. It does, but take the initial price of the game, say 60 Eur for an AAA title. Most companies go rich simply by selling a succesful game. Some companies even turn some of that money back into the game, and keep releasing patches and content for their game out of love, duty, and for making you interested in buying an expansion or a sequel. Take then, say 15 Eur a month sub fee. Sell just a million copies. That's ( 1KK x 60 ) + ( 1KK x 15 ) if everyone only ever just pays for a single month and quits. That's 75 million euros. That alone is enough to pay a decent salary for all your employees, cover your expenses, buy and maintain your own server park and keep a decent profit for the rest of all the lives of everyone involved. For the next 20 years, which is an extremely long time both for a game to still be played and for a studio that doesn't disband not to secure another round of income, these costs become less than trivial. There can be only two reasons for this amount not being enough: - Attempting to run a space program, or being greedy. But surely not everyone quits after one month? And the income keeps racking up. But, as I've said, I don't even want their servers. I'd run my own as long as I'm interested. As would countless others. Boom, no server costs, no maintenance for the company. Just keep patching for a year or two until things become solid enough to call truly finished. (Hells, a finished game on release day is a far off dream these days.......) That's all there is to it. They don't need your monthly payment to keep the operation running. They just want it. Take WoW for example: Their players pay their monthly sub fee, yet still have to pay full Tripple-A price for every expansion that comes out. Boom, double profits. Next point. Some of you believe, and even the dev blog claims, a P2P system with a monthly subscription fee protects the player more because..... reasons? In a truly F2P game, yeah, any moron can grief away with dozens of new accounts every day, true. But how does a monthly fee offer more deterrence from bannable behaviour than a buy once model? I already don't want to lose access to what I bought once, can I somehow don't want it more? I understand I would have spent more money on it, but in exchange for that money I received playtime, which I used up, and is impossible to take away without a brainwash, even if the account itself is lost forever. After a while you'll max out either way, and it can't take that long to start anew from scratch once you know how the game works. So I either care or I don't. There are no further magnitudes. And that's a true cause to worry about: Evil people write dev blogs like that, and stupid people believe them. Edit: Almost forgotten last point: In the end, it doesn't even matter what kind of payment model You, I, the next fellow, or the company want: Name a monthly-sub MMO that isn't WoW or EVE and didn't vanish or become F2P, because most of the people willing to be robbed monthly got hooked on those two way back when it was new and hip - And the only reason they won't quit, because that'd make a lie of their past 10 years and probably prompt some dark deeds now. Probably some fresh and sustainable MMOs exist out there with a P2P model, but I sure as hell am unaware of them. TLDR: -Exbawkshueg. Yay! -Let players build custom prefabs in-game! -Custom private servers cater to different needs and negate server costs for dev. company. Like Starmade. -P2P is bad 4 u, phat lewt for company. You stooooopid if you believe otherwise. -Buy once is decent, respectable. -Yer not WoW, yer not EVE, P2P ye won't succeed.
  • Create New...