Server Performance Background Information

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

  • Server Performance Background Information

    Fellow Adventurers,

    after the very hectic launch week has passed, we like to give you some background information on server performance.

    Prior to release, we created several forecast scenarios about post-launch player population. We also upgraded our hardware to the maximum level possible.

    As it turned out, even our most optimistic forecasts about player numbers where exceeded significantly.

    This caused a set of issues. Our goal is to fix most or all of them over the next 5-10 days.

    In general, there is three areas in which problems can occur:
    1. The server hardware itself is not sufficient.
    2. There are too many players in a single zone
    3. There are some code/software issues that only showed themselves in situations of crazy numbers
    1. is not the issue at all. The number or power of servers has nothing do to with the problems that we have seen in launch week, and no amount of "extra servers" would make a difference. You can see that for yourself when checking performance in non-overcrowded zones, these run really well.

    2. is a significant problem. If there is more than 1.100 players in a zone, the zone starts lagging. This is a hard technical limit, and the only solution to this is to reduce that number on a per zone basis. We will use the Caerleon solution for this, i.e. have the bank and market place sit inside a separate mini-cluster underground.
    Another option would be to split the main cities into multiple districts, or rework the Royal Continent to have more than 5 main cities. However, that is not something that we can do on short notice.

    3. was not a problem in general, we did not see any of these issues during our beta tests. They have started appearing due to the crazy numbers we are seeing. This is something that our coders are focusing all their attention on right now and we are expecting significant improvements here soon.

    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.

    In addition to the technical matters, we will also look into game balance to deal with the overcrowding of certain zones. 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.

    Kind regards,
    Stefan
  • Bercilak schrieb:

    In addition to the technical matters, we will also look into game balance to deal with the overcrowding of certain zones. 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.

    What about the whole galahad "we changed the map in such a way that we can easily add more clusters if player numbers exceeded expectations" thing?
  • Matsume schrieb:

    Bercilak schrieb:

    In addition to the technical matters, we will also look into game balance to deal with the overcrowding of certain zones. 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.
    What about the whole galahad "we changed the map in such a way that we can easily add more clusters if player numbers exceeded expectations" thing?

    That's a good question, I remember hearing this as well.
  • Thanks for the update, great news and i guess it's both great and awful to exceed your expectations :)

    Can't the city itself run in say 2-3 mini-clusters that are connected? or a district for each cluster ? that could balance the load, or can't it ?

    The Careleon solution is good but consider 1200 people that most of they do is instance in and out ah/bank/guild isle and the such, isn't there a better way to do this ?


    Thanks again, have a productive week ! ;)
    In game : Angelique. Raziel.
  • Matsume schrieb:

    Bercilak schrieb:

    In addition to the technical matters, we will also look into game balance to deal with the overcrowding of certain zones. 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.
    What about the whole galahad "we changed the map in such a way that we can easily add more clusters if player numbers exceeded expectations" thing?
    We can, but it's not needed. The zones in general are doing fine even with 400 players in them.
  • 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.
  • Awesome that we get some information, however:

    Bercilak schrieb:

    ...

    In addition to the technical matters, we will also look into game balance to deal with the overcrowding of certain zones. 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.

    Kind regards,
    Stefan
    wouldn't that totally mess crafters ??? lot of us would be left with items that cant be sold duo sudden drop of price caused by sudden drop of resources price again caused by mentioned respawn boost.
  • 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 hard limit to how many players can fight in the same screen without lag, and 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.
    This ^

    100v100 is pretty bloody stable for what is happening on the screen...

    ☠️RUIN☠️
    YOU WILL BE RUINED!

  • 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
    a fair fight for me is when people are more than us. Then they actually have a chance to stay alive.
  • SilentQT schrieb:

    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 hard limit to how many players can fight in the same screen without lag, and 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.
    This ^
    100v100 is pretty bloody stable for what is happening on the screen...
    stable?have you participated in any 100vs100+ in the last few days?XD
    a fair fight for me is when people are more than us. Then they actually have a chance to stay alive.
  • Kappatronic schrieb:

    1100 in a zone starts lagging?we had 100vs100 fights and the lag was insane and the disconnects. lol
    Yeap, everything is overcrowded. Small scale/solo pvp does not exist (except hellgates etc but still its is 5v5 and groups have to fight around portal).

    Black zones are to small what lead to crazy guild and alliance numbers. There are guilds with 3 names/subguilds already to keep inviting new players. Sure every one is interested to join, no one can be even little bit competitive to this numbers and to good starting position what this guilds/aliances have got from release. This can only lead to massive fights with 100-1000 ppl and any client or PC cant handle this numbers :D

    So now it will be about that how strong Iron/PC your guild members have got, not about skill :D
  • 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.
    Please do the same to all the PvE dungeons. Currently the t4/t5 big dungeons are overcrowded beyond hope. If possible just add more T4/5 dungeons per map. I rather have more dungeons or faster re-spawn than running around for minutes to finally find something to kill.

    I'm also disappointing that there is only one T6 expedition map, while this will most likely be the map that is played after the first week. So why are there multiple T5 variations, if you could easily predict that players will end-up running the same T6 map after a few days for weeks/months?

    So far i also was not able to get into any green/bluw/yellow HG, since if it spawned there are always players faster because of the overcrowding. So just increase spawn rate and add extra spawn locations for HG please.
  • Bercilak schrieb:

    Fellow Adventurers,

    after the very hectic launch week has passed, we like to give you some background information on server performance.

    Prior to release, we created several forecast scenarios about post-launch player population. We also upgraded our hardware to the maximum level possible.

    As it turned out, even our most optimistic forecasts about player numbers where exceeded significantly.

    This caused a set of issues. Our goal is to fix most or all of them over the next 5-10 days.

    In general, there is three areas in which problems can occur:
    1. The server hardware itself is not sufficient.
    2. There are too many players in a single zone
    3. There are some code/software issues that only showed themselves in situations of crazy numbers
    1. is not the issue at all. The number or power of servers has nothing do to with the problems that we have seen in launch week, and no amount of "extra servers" would make a difference. You can see that for yourself when checking performance in non-overcrowded zones, these run really well.

    2. is a significant problem. If there is more than 1.100 players in a zone, the zone starts lagging. This is a hard technical limit, and the only solution to this is to reduce that number on a per zone basis. We will use the Caerleon solution for this, i.e. have the bank and market place sit inside a separate mini-cluster underground.
    Another option would be to split the main cities into multiple districts, or rework the Royal Continent to have more than 5 main cities. However, that is not something that we can do on short notice.

    3. was not a problem in general, we did not see any of these issues during our beta tests. They have started appearing due to the crazy numbers we are seeing. This is something that our coders are focusing all their attention on right now and we are expecting significant improvements here soon.

    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.

    In addition to the technical matters, we will also look into game balance to deal with the overcrowding of certain zones. 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.

    Kind regards,
    Stefan
    It's completely impossible to predict the numbers on launch week and whether it will still be wild in the near future, just different bridges to cross as confirmations on numbers are complete.
    We all appreciate the hard work you all are putting into this game, but theres no need for any dramatic changes this early in the game. Just ride it out and see how it goes over the next couple of weeks.

    Once again, congrats on the success of the game and at the same time, sorry about it too haha.
    // GodZeus
  • Sardion schrieb:

    Kappatronic schrieb:

    1100 in a zone starts lagging?we had 100vs100 fights and the lag was insane and the disconnects. lol
    Yeap, everything is overcrowded. Small scale/solo pvp does not exist (except hellgates etc but still its is 5v5 and groups have to fight around portal).
    Black zones are to small what lead to crazy guild and alliance numbers. There are guilds with 3 names/subguilds already to keep inviting new players. Sure every one is interested to join, no one can be even little bit competitive to this numbers and to good starting position what this guilds/aliances have got from release. This can only lead to massive fights with 100-1000 ppl and any client or PC cant handle this numbers :D
    I have participated in 100vs100 fights in Lineage 2 officcial and other mmos and my pc was on 40+ fps. i7+1060ti. So i am pretty sure its not the pc that cant handle but the server side.
    a fair fight for me is when people are more than us. Then they actually have a chance to stay alive.
  • Kappatronic schrieb:

    I have participated in 100vs100 fights in Lineage 2 officcial and other mmos and my pc was on 40+ fps. i7+1060ti. So i am pretty sure its not the pc that cant handle but the server side.
    Nope mate, it is about your clinet/pc performace as well. Do not forget this game is released as multi platform / tablets / even smartphones. Majority of players/clients do not have server on desk(i7) just notebooks. So now it is not about skill but about power of your iron on table :D. I have got notebook in cost of 700 $ and in 200 ppl area i have got 5-15 fps and 100 ms.
  • Sardion schrieb:

    Kappatronic schrieb:

    I have participated in 100vs100 fights in Lineage 2 officcial and other mmos and my pc was on 40+ fps. i7+1060ti. So i am pretty sure its not the pc that cant handle but the server side.
    Nope mate, it is about your clinet/pc performace as well. Do not forget this game is released as multi platform / tablets / even smartphones. Majority of players/clients do not have server on desk(i7) just notebooks. So now it is not about skill but about power of your iron on table :D. I have got notebook in cost of 700 $ and in 200 ppl area i have got 5-15 fps and 100 ms.
    are you trolling or?how can you compare notebook to actual pc.
    a fair fight for me is when people are more than us. Then they actually have a chance to stay alive.
  • 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.