Server Performance Background Information

Diese Seite verwendet Cookies. Durch die Nutzung unserer Seite erklären Sie sich damit einverstanden, dass wir Cookies setzen. Weitere Informationen

  • Korn schrieb:

    Kappatronic schrieb:

    So in the end the zvz open world situations are just gonna be on who has the most numbers and the most aoe?that was not the case in betas.We had a small fight vs one guild in territory zvz. Lag was ok. could use skills could kite could dodge. Then big zerg guild comes and everyone just sees screenshots. oh well
    No, that's not what we are saying. The game is designed in such a way that it should never be "worth it" to bring so many players to a single fight. Take PvP chests for example: if there is enough of them, and they come online at the exact same time, than there is a natural incentive to split up for maximum rewards. The same holds true for castle fights. And the same holds true for "normal" zones, as if there is too many players in them at the same time, there won't be enough mobs and resources to farm.
    Having said that, there are a few cases where this principle is not true, such as when a territory is dropped by a guild and becomes available for capture in the open world. This is something we'll look into.
    Well it is clearly "worth it" since that's what the larger guilds like doing. I've been in 5+ large scale rubberband ZvZ's in the past 3 days.
    I'd say it's more "worth it" than doing chests since you have a chance to wipe an entire Zerg, getting their horses and equipment.
  • Bercilak schrieb:

    In particular, we'll look into the respawn rates of resources and might give them a temporary boost while such a large number of players stands at the same progression levels, competing over the same resources.
    I am running through zones, that feel like being invaded by locusts swarms. Even though the respawn rate feels better than in "pancake beta", the general gameplay as a gatherer is under a heavy burden. Especially with the T5 bottleneck you created.

    We are running into the same old problem, where players choose between silver/fame or resource/fame and maintain the crafting/farming with secondary interest. The moment we see a higher respawn rate, the crafters get hit in the face.

    The best solution overall - and i am still convinced it will work - is putting the black market NPC in all green cities, capped at T5 items. That would allow for more sustainable drops for low tier items and a higher amount of drop-tuning. The Caerleon only solution can not hold up. Your forced pvp way is killing this features potential, while a capped npc would allow both at the same time; incentive to be used by green city players, following the same logic as the presented map usage (green into yellow - close to the city (T5 cap), red - further away) + incentive to level up and use the Cearleon npc for high level goods with the risk of full loot.

    The exclusion of the majority of the crafter palyerbase, only to push pvp a little bit more, is a controversal decision that has created long discussions prior to release.
  • Sardion schrieb:

    Kappatronic schrieb:

    are you trolling or?how can you compare notebook to actual pc.
    Thx mate for your polite and nice argument. I will just let you know there are gaming notebooks 4/5 times more performance then average desktop ^^.
    since when is 1060ti and i7 average.

    Also thanks Korn for the heads up on the possibility of fixes in the territory fights like farms/dropped territories/etc. Game is running smooth on 1060ti and i7. I ve lost 5 sets of 4.3 gear so far but i could care less this is what albion is for but you know it kinda gets disheartening when its due to server issues and not just losing it due to being dumb or getting outplayed. But as i said i could care less because albion in the past 3 years has made huge improvements . Keep up the good work!
    a fair fight for me is when people are more than us. Then they actually have a chance to stay alive.
  • @Korn the issue concerning the zerg fights is really accurate as it concerns most blackzone objectives at the moment.
    it should really be a focus imo as it decreases the experience of many players, especially with the incoming castle fights next Sunday.
    For your information most zerg fights are just ending with the biggest group winning because noone can even move, and spells randomly cast sometimes.
    i hope it is on your roadmap to fix that kind of situation otherwise it will only end with people leaving the game, because it's not playable at the moment.
  • Kappatronic schrieb:

    since when is 1060ti and i7 average.

    Also thanks Korn for the heads up on the possibility of fixes in the territory fights like farms/dropped territories/etc. Game is running smooth on 1060ti and i7. I ve lost 5 sets of 4.3 gear so far but i could care less this is what albion is for but you know it kinda gets disheartening when its due to server issues and not just losing it due to being dumb or getting outplayed. But as i said i could care less because albion in the past 3 years has made huge improvements . Keep up the good work!
    Do not take everything personal, i was not talking about your desktop but generally.

    And yep. GL Devs, you ve got now such a hard work to brings this massive community that what was promised / expected. I think you can handle it very well :D Hope improvements will come soon.
  • Gugusteh schrieb:

    @Korn the issue concerning the zerg fights is really accurate as it concerns most blackzone objectives at the moment.
    it should really be a focus imo as it decreases the experience of many players, especially with the incoming castle fights next Sunday.
    For your information most zerg fights are just ending with the biggest group winning because noone can even move, and spells randomly cast sometimes.
    i hope it is on your roadmap to fix that kind of situation otherwise it will only end with people leaving the game, because it's not playable at the moment.
    Not the biggest, TC have been groups double the size of ours.
  • Bercilak schrieb:

    Now, on a more general level, we could tackle the issues that we have right now by reducing the number of players that the servers allow at the moment. However, this would mean that thousands or players would have to wait in queues. We made the decision that we'd rather have the occasional server outage instead.
    WTF!?!?!?!

    Do you make random kick from game? Inside HG
  • Gugusteh schrieb:

    @Korn the issue concerning the zerg fights is really accurate as it concerns most blackzone objectives at the moment.
    it should really be a focus imo as it decreases the experience of many players, especially with the incoming castle fights next Sunday.
    For your information most zerg fights are just ending with the biggest group winning because noone can even move, and spells randomly cast sometimes.
    i hope it is on your roadmap to fix that kind of situation otherwise it will only end with people leaving the game, because it's not playable at the moment.
    Improving performance in large fights is a key priority for us, and we believe that significant improvements can be made. This is an ongoing effort of constant optimization. It has to go hand in hand however with designing objectives and the world in such a way that there is no incentive for "over-zerging" in the first place.
  • Korn schrieb:

    Gugusteh schrieb:

    @Korn the issue concerning the zerg fights is really accurate as it concerns most blackzone objectives at the moment.
    it should really be a focus imo as it decreases the experience of many players, especially with the incoming castle fights next Sunday.
    For your information most zerg fights are just ending with the biggest group winning because noone can even move, and spells randomly cast sometimes.
    i hope it is on your roadmap to fix that kind of situation otherwise it will only end with people leaving the game, because it's not playable at the moment.
    Improving performance in large fights is a key priority for us, and we believe that significant improvements can be made. This is an ongoing effort of constant optimization. It has to go hand in hand however with designing objectives and the world in such a way that there is no incentive for "over-zerging" in the first place.
    So you're telling us that we shouldn't play the game how we want, we should play how the Devs want?
    We don't "over-zerg" because there's an incentive, we do it because of the fun we get from it. What the game is meant to be, fun.
  • Korn schrieb:

    Kappatronic schrieb:

    1100 in a zone starts lagging?we had 100vs100 fights and the lag was insane and the disconnects. lol
    There is also a strong limit to how many players can fight in the same screen without lag, and, to our knowledge, there is no game that can surpass it - Eve Online being a special case to an extent as each player does very little in a fight in terms of movement, abilities used, etc, hence much less data is created per player compared to Albion. On top of that, they slow down "time" if fights get very large, which is something we might also look into in the future.

    Hopefully time dialation will be a last resort kind of thing, because personally i think time dialation fights are very boring.
    In Eve i could go take a shower inbetween my gun volleys, and i got a lot of shit done around my house but that's not what im supposed to do when i fire up a game :D
    -- Quote me if you want a response! --
  • DeseanDwyer schrieb:

    Korn schrieb:

    Gugusteh schrieb:

    @Korn the issue concerning the zerg fights is really accurate as it concerns most blackzone objectives at the moment.
    it should really be a focus imo as it decreases the experience of many players, especially with the incoming castle fights next Sunday.
    For your information most zerg fights are just ending with the biggest group winning because noone can even move, and spells randomly cast sometimes.
    i hope it is on your roadmap to fix that kind of situation otherwise it will only end with people leaving the game, because it's not playable at the moment.
    Improving performance in large fights is a key priority for us, and we believe that significant improvements can be made. This is an ongoing effort of constant optimization. It has to go hand in hand however with designing objectives and the world in such a way that there is no incentive for "over-zerging" in the first place.
    So you're telling us that we shouldn't play the game how we want, we should play how the Devs want?We don't "over-zerg" because there's an incentive, we do it because of the fun we get from it. What the game is meant to be, fun.
    What is fun is rly subjective expression. For example if over zerging is fun for 700 ppl guild (sure why not) on the other hand is not fun for next 40k ppl playing in many 10-50 ppl guilds. And what do you think makes mmo community? That guild with 700 ppl or that other 40k ppl? Devs are talking about balance how do not destroy mmo community and keep everyone in fun, not only you.
  • Sardion schrieb:

    DeseanDwyer schrieb:

    Korn schrieb:

    Gugusteh schrieb:

    @Korn the issue concerning the zerg fights is really accurate as it concerns most blackzone objectives at the moment.
    it should really be a focus imo as it decreases the experience of many players, especially with the incoming castle fights next Sunday.
    For your information most zerg fights are just ending with the biggest group winning because noone can even move, and spells randomly cast sometimes.
    i hope it is on your roadmap to fix that kind of situation otherwise it will only end with people leaving the game, because it's not playable at the moment.
    Improving performance in large fights is a key priority for us, and we believe that significant improvements can be made. This is an ongoing effort of constant optimization. It has to go hand in hand however with designing objectives and the world in such a way that there is no incentive for "over-zerging" in the first place.
    So you're telling us that we shouldn't play the game how we want, we should play how the Devs want?We don't "over-zerg" because there's an incentive, we do it because of the fun we get from it. What the game is meant to be, fun.
    What is fun is rly subjective expression. For example if over zerging is fun for 700 ppl guild (sure why not) on the other hand is not fun for next 40k ppl playing in many 10-50 ppl guilds. And what do you think makes mmo community? That guild with 700 ppl or that other 40k ppl? Devs are talking about balance how do not destroy mmo community and keep everyone in fun, not only you.
    I'm talking about Black Zones.
  • DeseanDwyer schrieb:

    Korn schrieb:

    Kappatronic schrieb:

    So in the end the zvz open world situations are just gonna be on who has the most numbers and the most aoe?that was not the case in betas.We had a small fight vs one guild in territory zvz. Lag was ok. could use skills could kite could dodge. Then big zerg guild comes and everyone just sees screenshots. oh well
    No, that's not what we are saying. The game is designed in such a way that it should never be "worth it" to bring so many players to a single fight. Take PvP chests for example: if there is enough of them, and they come online at the exact same time, than there is a natural incentive to split up for maximum rewards. The same holds true for castle fights. And the same holds true for "normal" zones, as if there is too many players in them at the same time, there won't be enough mobs and resources to farm.Having said that, there are a few cases where this principle is not true, such as when a territory is dropped by a guild and becomes available for capture in the open world. This is something we'll look into.
    Well it is clearly "worth it" since that's what the larger guilds like doing. I've been in 5+ large scale rubberband ZvZ's in the past 3 days.I'd say it's more "worth it" than doing chests since you have a chance to wipe an entire Zerg, getting their horses and equipment.
    I think what he is saying is you Trash Cans in these super zergy clans are not only gaining less but fucking up your own enjoyment by rolling with squads of 100 people because you get dumpstered anytime you dont have 99 greens next to you. That there is enough content to split up and have enjoyable reasonably large scale fights lets say 20v20 that will be less laggy and more enjoyable for everyone involved. Not to mention more profitable. That the devs were aware of the technical issues with having 100's of people moving and casting spells on the same screen. So by design the encouraged you to not to do this. Most of you are just to fucking simple to enjoy a actually risking your t4 trash to engage in a skill based team fight that requires actual timing, communication and co-ordination as opposed to who had the most AOE's to spam over the first stun.


    \
  • OfficerDoofy schrieb:

    DeseanDwyer schrieb:

    Korn schrieb:

    Kappatronic schrieb:

    So in the end the zvz open world situations are just gonna be on who has the most numbers and the most aoe?that was not the case in betas.We had a small fight vs one guild in territory zvz. Lag was ok. could use skills could kite could dodge. Then big zerg guild comes and everyone just sees screenshots. oh well
    No, that's not what we are saying. The game is designed in such a way that it should never be "worth it" to bring so many players to a single fight. Take PvP chests for example: if there is enough of them, and they come online at the exact same time, than there is a natural incentive to split up for maximum rewards. The same holds true for castle fights. And the same holds true for "normal" zones, as if there is too many players in them at the same time, there won't be enough mobs and resources to farm.Having said that, there are a few cases where this principle is not true, such as when a territory is dropped by a guild and becomes available for capture in the open world. This is something we'll look into.
    Well it is clearly "worth it" since that's what the larger guilds like doing. I've been in 5+ large scale rubberband ZvZ's in the past 3 days.I'd say it's more "worth it" than doing chests since you have a chance to wipe an entire Zerg, getting their horses and equipment.
    I think what he is saying is you Trash Cans in these super zergy clans are not only gaining less but fucking up your own enjoyment by rolling with squads of 100 people because you get dumpstered anytime you dont have 99 greens next to you. That there is enough content to split up and have enjoyable reasonably large scale fights lets say 20v20 that will be less laggy and more enjoyable for everyone involved. Not to mention more profitable. That the devs were aware of the technical issues with having 100's of people moving and casting spells on the same screen. So by design the encouraged you to not to do this. Most of you are just to fucking simple to enjoy a actually risking your t4 trash to engage in a skill based team fight that requires actual timing, communication and co-ordination as opposed to who had the most AOE's to spam over the first stun.

    \
    The salt is strong, you've clearly got killed for your T3 in a red zone.
    Edit: Nvm you just hate on guilds seeing from your recent activity.
  • Korn schrieb:

    Kappatronic schrieb:

    1100 in a zone starts lagging?we had 100vs100 fights and the lag was insane and the disconnects. lol
    There is a difference between players in a city and players fighting in the same screen, as the amount of data transmitted gets crazy.
    There is also a strong limit to how many players can fight in the same screen without lag, and, to our knowledge, there is no game that can surpass it - Eve Online being a special case to an extent as each player does very little in a fight in terms of movement, abilities used, etc, hence much less data is created per player compared to Albion. On top of that, they slow down "time" if fights get very large, which is something we might also look into in the future.

    When it comes to game design, you will note that we always make sure that multiple PvP objectives are available at the same time, hence encouraging the player base to naturally split between them as it is more rewarding to do so. There are some exceptions to this, for example, if a territory is dropped, etc. Here, from a game design point of view, this is something we will do further work on.
    Knowing that, why didn't you make gvg fights instanced? As it stands now anyone can create favorable conditions for their team by lagging out the zone. All you need is 60 ping in AO and a hefty Zerg of 500 people spamming spells around gvg zone.
    This would make 130 ping players immobile while 60 ping players would still be able to move. This was proved working on launch, in building territory claim Race.