hands0medevil wrote: »Cyrodill in 2030 will be 4v4v4
I just don't think the game can handle the style of healing and aoe they have in this game especially when you have so many spamming them, hence the server latency issues. Its just a fact and it cannot be changed because it would hugely impact PVE the much larger portion of the player base.
I just don't think the game can handle the style of healing and aoe they have in this game especially when you have so many spamming them, hence the server latency issues. Its just a fact and it cannot be changed because it would hugely impact PVE the much larger portion of the player base.
I just don't think the game can handle the style of healing and aoe they have in this game especially when you have so many spamming them, hence the server latency issues. Its just a fact and it cannot be changed because it would hugely impact PVE the much larger portion of the player base.
I thought of this too, but why is the lag worsening if this is the case? Cyrodiil used to work better with way more people in it. Sure over time players have generally gotten better and they probably used less abilities in the past. However, Cyro had double (probably more) the population to make up for this. How did this game work so much better 6 years ago?
I just don't think the game can handle the style of healing and aoe they have in this game especially when you have so many spamming them, hence the server latency issues. Its just a fact and it cannot be changed because it would hugely impact PVE the much larger portion of the player base.
I just don't think the game can handle the style of healing and aoe they have in this game especially when you have so many spamming them, hence the server latency issues. Its just a fact and it cannot be changed because it would hugely impact PVE the much larger portion of the player base.
TheEndBringer wrote: »People need to stop packing in GH. I get it. Alliance lock is preferable to non locked for most players. And everyone wants big battles. But if the two campaigns had a balanced population across alliances it would help lag in GH and make BR more exciting.
We'll see what happens with update 31. If GH is no proc and BR proc (or vice versa) it will likely cause the populations to shift.
I just don't think the game can handle the style of healing and aoe they have in this game especially when you have so many spamming them, hence the server latency issues. Its just a fact and it cannot be changed because it would hugely impact PVE the much larger portion of the player base.
There are countless old videos of much larger battles with aoes being spammed. Back then most calculations were client side though.
TheEndBringer wrote: »People need to stop packing in GH. I get it. Alliance lock is preferable to non locked for most players. And everyone wants big battles. But if the two campaigns had a balanced population across alliances it would help lag in GH and make BR more exciting.
We'll see what happens with update 31. If GH is no proc and BR proc (or vice versa) it will likely cause the populations to shift.
I only play in GH because that's where the people are at. I'd gladly play in other servers if there were people to fight there, but I don't wanna ride around from keep to keep to fight the same five man groups in an empty campaign. I dont want to play in GH but that's where the people are and therefore the PVP is at
I just don't think the game can handle the style of healing and aoe they have in this game especially when you have so many spamming them, hence the server latency issues. Its just a fact and it cannot be changed because it would hugely impact PVE the much larger portion of the player base.
I thought of this too, but why is the lag worsening if this is the case? Cyrodiil used to work better with way more people in it. Sure over time players have generally gotten better and they probably used less abilities in the past. However, Cyro had double (probably more) the population to make up for this. How did this game work so much better 6 years ago?