Dont Play ALBION online

    • Dont Play ALBION online

      Hello everyone after the "Succes" F2P for me no succes game start be trash.I die in black zone with 10m+ loot and items and its only cause game kick me when i go back i see me bud i cant do nothing when i run out i see my character go out bud in this stupid game still on the position one man come and kill me. This think do game to me all day from F2P disconecting kicking from game hight ping problem. Unplayntable and dont wort of play. Im veteran member bud want my money back i paid for game no for trash like this unplayntable TRASH.
      For everyone new who read this dont play ALBION online. Game services is horible like whole game.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Evas_Flarelight ().

    • So, you get killed and now the game is trash? Lol I can see you may have some anger issues. You would have probabily died anyway.

      To new players: Dont listen to this guy. Yes, the game is having some lag problems right now, but devs are working fast to solve them. Feel free to join the game. By the time you guys get to the point where you will be doing pvp with valuable gear, the lag will probabily be fixed.

      Devs need to move this post to rants section cause this is clearly not an introduction post.
    • mishuliak wrote:

      ello everyone after the "Succes" F2P for me no succes game start be trash.I die in black zone with 10m+ loot and items and its only cause game kick me when i go back i see me bud i cant do nothing when i run out i see my character go out bud in this stupid game still on the position one man come and kill me. This think do game to me all day from F2P disconecting kicking from game hight ping problem. Unplayntable and dont wort of play. Im veteran member bud want my money back i paid for game no for trash like this unplayntable TRASH.
      For everyone new who read this dont play ALBION online. Game services is horible like whole game.
      this is ur character? albiononline2d.com/en/scoreboa…rs/FrGDL4eTQhKiudDnvZitCQ

      if yes which one death was worth 10 m? if no what's your ingame character name ?
    • Holoin wrote:

      So, you get killed and now the game is trash? Lol I can see you may have some anger issues. You would have probabily died anyway.

      To new players: Dont listen to this guy. Yes, the game is having some lag problems right now, but devs are working fast to solve them. Feel free to join the game. By the time you guys get to the point where you will be doing pvp with valuable gear, the lag will probabily be fixed.

      Devs need to move this post to rants section cause this is clearly not an introduction post.
      Are they? I thought so to... like.. 2 years ago :)

      This could be fixed by differenciating EU/NA/SA/ASIA Servers. 1 per continent.
    • VirtualDreams wrote:

      Holoin wrote:

      So, you get killed and now the game is trash? Lol I can see you may have some anger issues. You would have probabily died anyway.

      To new players: Dont listen to this guy. Yes, the game is having some lag problems right now, but devs are working fast to solve them. Feel free to join the game. By the time you guys get to the point where you will be doing pvp with valuable gear, the lag will probabily be fixed.

      Devs need to move this post to rants section cause this is clearly not an introduction post.
      Are they? I thought so to... like.. 2 years ago :)
      This could be fixed by differenciating EU/NA/SA/ASIA Servers. 1 per continent.
      2 years ago they dint had 10 times the amount of players. Severs would destroy the game. This game has no other option than one server. More than one and it dies. Oh, and multiple servers means no more zergs lol.
    • Holoin wrote:

      VirtualDreams wrote:

      Holoin wrote:

      So, you get killed and now the game is trash? Lol I can see you may have some anger issues. You would have probabily died anyway.

      To new players: Dont listen to this guy. Yes, the game is having some lag problems right now, but devs are working fast to solve them. Feel free to join the game. By the time you guys get to the point where you will be doing pvp with valuable gear, the lag will probabily be fixed.

      Devs need to move this post to rants section cause this is clearly not an introduction post.
      Are they? I thought so to... like.. 2 years ago :) This could be fixed by differenciating EU/NA/SA/ASIA Servers. 1 per continent.
      2 years ago they dint had 10 times the amount of players. Severs would destroy the game. This game has no other option than one server. More than one and it dies. Oh, and multiple servers means no more zergs lol.
      It means better connection, more players would probably join. The way it is now, It's becaming unplayable. Either way, devs do not care about that, they only want one server working, and that's it. It will eventually drop the player base due to these instability. At least, I left this 560 days ago almost 2 years ago, because of the same reason. Lag does not help. If I go PvP vs an NA player, and a veteran one, there's no chance I'll win.

      But hey, here I am back again, trying to see if it will work out now.
    • VirtualDreams wrote:

      Holoin wrote:

      VirtualDreams wrote:

      Holoin wrote:

      So, you get killed and now the game is trash? Lol I can see you may have some anger issues. You would have probabily died anyway.

      To new players: Dont listen to this guy. Yes, the game is having some lag problems right now, but devs are working fast to solve them. Feel free to join the game. By the time you guys get to the point where you will be doing pvp with valuable gear, the lag will probabily be fixed.

      Devs need to move this post to rants section cause this is clearly not an introduction post.
      Are they? I thought so to... like.. 2 years ago :) This could be fixed by differenciating EU/NA/SA/ASIA Servers. 1 per continent.
      2 years ago they dint had 10 times the amount of players. Severs would destroy the game. This game has no other option than one server. More than one and it dies. Oh, and multiple servers means no more zergs lol.
      It means better connection, more players would probably join. The way it is now, It's becaming unplayable. Either way, devs do not care about that, they only want one server working, and that's it. It will eventually drop the player base due to these instability. At least, I left this 560 days ago almost 2 years ago, because of the same reason. Lag does not help. If I go PvP vs an NA player, and a veteran one, there's no chance I'll win.
      But hey, here I am back again, trying to see if it will work out now.
      population will eventually drop after the free to play rush. These rush normaly last 1-3 months. After, population decreases greatly.

      With multiple servers, when populatipn eventualy decreases, servers will becone too empty. What will the players with accounts in those servers do? They will have no one to play with, no players to gank, very little pvp etc.

      Then what most games do when this happens is that they merge servers.

      But due to the way the economy works in albion, servers cannot be merged. That will cause all servers to eventually die. Also multiple servers will change the population by timezones. With multiple servers, servers will only have people at a certain peak hour, after that hour, servers become empty.

      Then, you guys will be crying in forums about servers being empty.

      One big server solves all those problems.

      In one big server, population will become stable. If too many players play, they will eventually leave due to lag. After those many players leave, lag becomes less of a problem and population never gets too low.

      This is not about getting more players to play, but about getting a stable population. A stable population brings enough money to the game.
    • Exactly Holoin.

      The concept of complaining about lag when there's just been a free to play expansion is pretty short-sighted in my opinion.

      I think players need to give Albion time to adjust. I'm new here but a few days ago I logged out in a spot that had 4 ore rocks in the same spot, and after an update there were only 2 ore rocks.

      It means I had to go find a different spot, but it also tells me that the game devs are changing things, tweaking and making necessary game balancing adjustments.

      That is why I suggest "give it time".
      » ᴘ ᴇ ɴ ɢ ᴜ ɪ ɴ • s ɴ ɪ ᴘ ᴇ ʀ « bit.ly/pokerface-albion
    • PenguinSniper wrote:

      Exactly Holoin.

      The concept of complaining about lag when there's just been a free to play expansion is pretty short-sighted in my opinion.

      I think players need to give Albion time to adjust. I'm new here but a few days ago I logged out in a spot that had 4 ore rocks in the same spot, and after an update there were only 2 ore rocks.

      It means I had to go find a different spot, but it also tells me that the game devs are changing things, tweaking and making necessary game balancing adjustments.

      That is why I suggest "give it time".

      The thing is, I can see theorically lots of things to implement and fix it easily. But it costs money, in other terms, investing. Zones like Blue/Yellow, it could be a central servers as far as I care. But the red/blackzones, the latency does influence a lot, and this, should be based in the continent where people are playing.

      For example, I read in a forum a great "ideia" to solve the misconception of empty servers. This new expansion could implement 3 continents instead of 2, and you could actually locate the servers on each continent SEA/NA/EU. This would somehow "balance" the whole "global server". Whereas, EU would have advantage in their own continent, SEA in theirs, and NA in theirs... This game is to unresponsive to me, 150ms for me is a lot, I can't kite at all, and even if I kite, a monster kill, drops the gold several tiles away from my character for example, and this, means the game itself is not updating packets correctly.

      Other solution would be to implement 1 central server per continent, while implementing load balancing to avoid networking problems. But it will always be NA, so.. I know this won't happen.
    • VirtualDreams wrote:

      The thing is, I can see theorically lots of things to implement and fix it easily. But it costs money, in other terms, investing. Zones like Blue/Yellow, it could be a central servers as far as I care. But the red/blackzones, the latency does influence a lot, and this, should be based in the continent where people are playing.

      For example, I read in a forum a great "ideia" to solve the misconception of empty servers. This new expansion could implement 3 continents instead of 2, and you could actually locate the servers on each continent SEA/NA/EU. This would somehow "balance" the whole "global server". Whereas, EU would have advantage in their own continent, SEA in theirs, and NA in theirs... This game is to unresponsive to me, 150ms for me is a lot, I can't kite at all, and even if I kite, a monster kill, drops the gold several tiles away from my character for example, and this, means the game itself is not updating packets correctly.

      Other solution would be to implement 1 central server per continent, while implementing load balancing to avoid networking problems. But it will always be NA, so.. I know this won't happen.
      That would not fix empty servers. Every continent has its peak hours and its dead hours. Dividing the game into continent per server would mean that each server willl have enough players at peak hours, but they will be empty in their dead hours.

      Also, such a solution would require for all 3 servers to pass information to each other. That is bad, really bad, atleast with today technology.

      The Idea sounds good, but its actually very bad. It would solve ping problems, but it will also create worse problems, including even more server lag than what we have today.

      If it was a good idea the devs would have implemented it years ago.

      You talk about easy fixes, I hope that was not the "easy" fix you had in mind, cause thats actually more of a break than a fix.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Holoin ().

    • sam wrote:

      As a North American player who works odd hours, I'm glad the game is global. I often play at unusual hours for my timezone and there's always people on, that's not common with other games.

      Also this is a pretty garbage OP.

      The servers are NA, that's why you dont feel our pain :D


      Holoin wrote:

      VirtualDreams wrote:

      The thing is, I can see theorically lots of things to implement and fix it easily. But it costs money, in other terms, investing. Zones like Blue/Yellow, it could be a central servers as far as I care. But the red/blackzones, the latency does influence a lot, and this, should be based in the continent where people are playing.

      For example, I read in a forum a great "ideia" to solve the misconception of empty servers. This new expansion could implement 3 continents instead of 2, and you could actually locate the servers on each continent SEA/NA/EU. This would somehow "balance" the whole "global server". Whereas, EU would have advantage in their own continent, SEA in theirs, and NA in theirs... This game is to unresponsive to me, 150ms for me is a lot, I can't kite at all, and even if I kite, a monster kill, drops the gold several tiles away from my character for example, and this, means the game itself is not updating packets correctly.

      Other solution would be to implement 1 central server per continent, while implementing load balancing to avoid networking problems. But it will always be NA, so.. I know this won't happen.
      That would not fix empty servers. Every continent has its peak hours and its dead hours. Dividing the game into continent per server would mean that each server willl have enough players at peak hours, but they will be empty in their dead hours.
      Also, such a solution would require for all 3 servers to pass information to each other. That is bad, really bad, atleast with today technology.

      The Idea sounds good, but its actually very bad. It would solve ping problems, but it will also create worse problems, including even more server lag than what we have today.

      If it was a good idea the devs would have implemented it years ago.

      You talk about easy fixes, I hope that was not the "easy" fix you had in mind, cause thats actually more of a break than a fix.

      Actually the split of continents would not cause more server lag at all, care to elaborate your logic in here?

      Each continent has zones, so each zone in a continent, belongs to a diff continente, but globally accessible, making the latency to the foreigners of that continent, Which means, the lag we as EU suffer, you would suffer in our continent, because it would still be a Global. Split by zones.

      But this a theory which won't be applied, also this topic already derailed a lot...
    • VirtualDreams wrote:

      The servers are NA, that's why you dont feel our pain :D


      Actually the split of continents would not cause more server lag at all, care to elaborate your logic in here?

      Each continent has zones, so each zone in a continent, belongs to a diff continente, but globally accessible, making the latency to the foreigners of that continent, Which means, the lag we as EU suffer, you would suffer in our continent, because it would still be a Global. Split by zones.

      But this a theory which won't be applied, also this topic already derailed a lot...
      Ok, let explain, it seems you dont understand even the basics.

      The idea you propose, would have the continents interacting with each other.(allowing people to travel continents in game)

      Lets say you have a server in USA, and one server in EU. This means that when servers eventually interact, that information has to travel from.USA to EU or vice versa. Then, after that traveling, it has to travel to your computer. Information does not travel instantly, it takes time. The longer the distance, the longer it takes to travel.


      The way albion works right now, with 1 single server, it only travels from USA server then to your pc, and from your pc to the USA server.

      The way you prupose, info would need to travel from USA server to EU server to Sea server then to your pc, and go back again. It means more travel time.A lot more travel time actually. While your pc will have a low ping, the conection between servers would be slow and laggy because the time it takes to travel such distances is simply too much.

      That is, asuming that the idea you prupose involve interacting servers(meaning that you could simply travel to those continent ingame or have the same character on all continents).

      If your idea does not involve interacting servers, then yes you would have low ping and little lag, but as I said earlier, on odd hours the game would be very empty and when the free to play rush ends, even peak hours would look empty.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Holoin ().

    • Holoin wrote:

      VirtualDreams wrote:

      The servers are NA, that's why you dont feel our pain :D


      Actually the split of continents would not cause more server lag at all, care to elaborate your logic in here?

      Each continent has zones, so each zone in a continent, belongs to a diff continente, but globally accessible, making the latency to the foreigners of that continent, Which means, the lag we as EU suffer, you would suffer in our continent, because it would still be a Global. Split by zones.

      But this a theory which won't be applied, also this topic already derailed a lot...
      Ok, let explain, it seems you dont understand even the basics.<br style="background-color: rgb(252, 253, 254);"><br style="background-color: rgb(252, 253, 254);">The idea you propose, would have the continents interacting with each other.It actually needs to, other wise the game economy would be poor and could be exploited(not gonna explain why, use logic)<br style="background-color: rgb(252, 253, 254);"><br style="background-color: rgb(252, 253, 254);">A server is a computer(or several computers). Lets say you have a server in USA, and one server in EU. This means that when servers eventually interact, that information has to travel from.USA to EU or vice versa. Then, after that traveling, it has to travel to your computer. Information does not travel instantly, it takes time. The longer the distance, the longer it takes to travel.<br style="background-color: rgb(252, 253, 254);"><br style="background-color: rgb(252, 253, 254);"><br style="background-color: rgb(252, 253, 254);">The way albion works right now, with 1 single server, it only travels from USA server then to your pc, and from your pc to the USA server.<br style="background-color: rgb(252, 253, 254);"><br style="background-color: rgb(252, 253, 254);">The way you prupose, info would need to travel from USA server to EU server to your pc, and go back again. It means more travel time.A lot more travel time actually. While your pc will have a low ping, the conection between servers would be slow and laggy, causing you to lag.<br style="background-color: rgb(252, 253, 254);"><br style="background-color: rgb(252, 253, 254);">That is, asuming that the idea you prupose involve interacting servers(meaning that you could simply travel to those continent ingame).<br style="background-color: rgb(252, 253, 254);"><br style="background-color: rgb(252, 253, 254);">If your idea does not involve interacting servers, then yes you would have low ping and little lag, but as I said earlier, on odd hours the game would be very empty and when the free to play rush ends, even peak hours would look empty.

      Apparently, you really don't understand anything from SysAdmin related. I'll explain a little bit for you.

      Several servers sharing resources is called a cluster (this is to improve the "concept of hardware failiure"), or you can also search for virtualization. Regarding the networking, there's also a solution called Site-2-Site IKEv2 (just an example) for VPN's, which does not expose the main servers for public, but like everything, it can be exploited, but not as MIM as you are saying, specially under encrypted traffic.

      Now I'll try to explain a little bit on the ideia you dont seem to understand.

      While there is a main server (Global), there are instances that let us say.. you know them as Zones (ex: Caerleon, Fort Sterling.. etc). Each zone, can be 1 server for all we know, and they are spread in NA. If a zone is separated from the global server, and is only "connected" to accept incoming/outgoing connections, my "ideia" would work. It wouldn't cause the lag you are saying it would. Simply, because, it's not streaming the information. It's under a TCP connection, but you can also search for that, not gonna bother explaining this.

      Let us see if I can make myself "clear" on this, the icy zone of fort sterling, could be hosted in EU, while other in NA, other in SEA and so on. The global is not hosting the whole players, I assume you understand that, since there are player caps by zone (logic). And this concept ideia, would not remove the "peak" hours that you are speaking of. Because they are all "connected", just not transmiting to each other constantly.

      And lastly, I do know of what I am speaking of, because I do work with server hosting on a daily basis.

      Peace.
    • VirtualDreams wrote:

      Apparently, you really don't understand anything from SysAdmin related. I'll explain a little bit for you.

      Several servers sharing resources is called a cluster (this is to improve the "concept of hardware failiure"), or you can also search for virtualization. Regarding the networking, there's also a solution called Site-2-Site IKEv2 (just an example) for VPN's, which does not expose the main servers for public, but like everything, it can be exploited, but not as MIM as you are saying, specially under encrypted traffic.

      Now I'll try to explain a little bit on the ideia you dont seem to understand.

      While there is a main server (Global), there are instances that let us say.. you know them as Zones (ex: Caerleon, Fort Sterling.. etc). Each zone, can be 1 server for all we know, and they are spread in NA. If a zone is separated from the global server, and is only "connected" to accept incoming/outgoing connections, my "ideia" would work. It wouldn't cause the lag you are saying it would. Simply, because, it's not streaming the information. It's under a TCP connection, but you can also search for that, not gonna bother explaining this.

      Let us see if I can make myself "clear" on this, the icy zone of fort sterling, could be hosted in EU, while other in NA, other in SEA and so on. The global is not hosting the whole players, I assume you understand that, since there are player caps by zone (logic). And this concept ideia, would not remove the "peak" hours that you are speaking of. Because they are all "connected", just not transmiting to each other constantly.

      And lastly, I do know of what I am speaking of, because I do work with server hosting on a daily basis.

      Peace.
      mmm...You still dont understand. Having a cluster of servers in USA cominicating with clusters of servers in EU is slower than having everything in just one server cluster. No matter if you use TCP or not, its still slower. It would resolve ping issue, but it would make servers more laggy. Servers are already laggy having everything in just a server, imagine if its spread between servers.


      Its amazing how you say that your Idea is an easy solution, yet no game has ever done such a thing.

      Either you are a genius, you are simply that dumb.

      The post was edited 2 times, last by Holoin ().

    • Holoin wrote:

      VirtualDreams wrote:

      Apparently, you really don't understand anything from SysAdmin related. I'll explain a little bit for you.

      Several servers sharing resources is called a cluster (this is to improve the "concept of hardware failiure"), or you can also search for virtualization. Regarding the networking, there's also a solution called Site-2-Site IKEv2 (just an example) for VPN's, which does not expose the main servers for public, but like everything, it can be exploited, but not as MIM as you are saying, specially under encrypted traffic.

      Now I'll try to explain a little bit on the ideia you dont seem to understand.

      While there is a main server (Global), there are instances that let us say.. you know them as Zones (ex: Caerleon, Fort Sterling.. etc). Each zone, can be 1 server for all we know, and they are spread in NA. If a zone is separated from the global server, and is only "connected" to accept incoming/outgoing connections, my "ideia" would work. It wouldn't cause the lag you are saying it would. Simply, because, it's not streaming the information. It's under a TCP connection, but you can also search for that, not gonna bother explaining this.

      Let us see if I can make myself "clear" on this, the icy zone of fort sterling, could be hosted in EU, while other in NA, other in SEA and so on. The global is not hosting the whole players, I assume you understand that, since there are player caps by zone (logic). And this concept ideia, would not remove the "peak" hours that you are speaking of. Because they are all "connected", just not transmiting to each other constantly.

      And lastly, I do know of what I am speaking of, because I do work with server hosting on a daily basis.

      Peace.
      mmm...You still dont understand. Having a cluster of servers in USA cominicating with clusters of servers in EU is slower than having everything in just one server cluster. No matter if you use TCP or not, its still slower. It would resolve ping issue, but it would make servers more laggy. Servers are already laggy having everything in just a server, imagine if its spread between servers.

      Its amazing how you say that your Idea is an easy solution, yet no game has ever done such a thing.

      Either you are a genius, you are simply that dumb.
      Oh boy, you still don't get it.

      Do you see more then 1k players inside a zone? Assume, that everyzone is a server (the devs already said its more then 1 server). Do you understand what I am trying to say? Because currently, Albion does not host more then 800 per server, that is the player cap they limited for a server. And even they do, they could reallocate to other datacenter, because it just does not influence it. Each zone, is different processing, that's why it is separated by zones. Do you understand what I am trying to say?

      Currently, ingame, you are communication with the server that hosts the Zone, not the "global". The global, is only an interface redirecting you to the proper server (located in NA).