Maintenance for the week of December 23:
• NA megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
• EU megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 14:00 UTC (9:00AM EST)
• NA megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
• EU megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 14:00 UTC (9:00AM EST)
STOP THE TEST NOW!!!!
Concrete
✭✭✭
Cyro is the ABSOLUTE WORST it has ever been
Edited by ZOS_Hadeostry on 8 December 2023 04:15 6
-
EdjeSwift✭✭✭✭✭
✭Could you share on how? Show us some screenshots of the population/queuesAntiquities Addict8 -
flubber77✭✭✭✭Could you share on how? Show us some screenshots of the population/queues
I can, the lagg is so bad and we are on 3/3/2 bars. skills dont work, or go off after like 10 sec in combat.
Seems like they did downgrade the server to the stoneage.....
Still a grudge, only to see false what u want and nothing less.2 -
EdjeSwift✭✭✭✭✭
✭This is probably why they're doing the capacity test to see just how bad they can push it. Probably started a little higher than they expected... I hope.Antiquities Addict10 -
KiltMaster✭✭✭✭Did they really think this test was going to go well? Cyrodiil performance sucked as-is. Increasing performance would obviously make it suck worse.PC/NA
GM of "Kilts for Sale"
twitch.tv/thekiltmaster
He/Him5 -
flubber77✭✭✭✭OtarTheMad wrote: »I applaud them for trying. Maybe they can tweak some things and improve it.
they have tried that since 2014 and still this is maybe the worst try ever. and i really dont get them, are they still running the cheap version of server after they did cut them in 10 parts after the first year? or is it the code they use that are so bad? cause this is painful and reminds me of late 90's when online games tok off and we used 128bits phone connection.
Still a grudge, only to see false what u want and nothing less.5 -
OtarTheMad✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭OtarTheMad wrote: »I applaud them for trying. Maybe they can tweak some things and improve it.
they have tried that since 2014 and still this is maybe the worst try ever. and i really dont get them, are they still running the cheap version of server after they did cut them in 10 parts after the first year? or is it the code they use that are so bad? cause this is painful and reminds me of late 90's when online games tok off and we used 128bits phone connection.
I’m still happy they are trying to make Cyrodiil better. They can only really test on the live servers so it sucks when an idea doesn’t go well but I’d rather them keep trying then not.
15 -
flubber77✭✭✭✭OtarTheMad wrote: »OtarTheMad wrote: »I applaud them for trying. Maybe they can tweak some things and improve it.
they have tried that since 2014 and still this is maybe the worst try ever. and i really dont get them, are they still running the cheap version of server after they did cut them in 10 parts after the first year? or is it the code they use that are so bad? cause this is painful and reminds me of late 90's when online games tok off and we used 128bits phone connection.
I’m still happy they are trying to make Cyrodiil better. They can only really test on the live servers so it sucks when an idea doesn’t go well but I’d rather them keep trying then not.
Maybe they should start using some money on servers then? or hire better coders, cause they did fire those that did some real change and after that it did go south again.but yes i do want them to make pvp better. but are they ready to use the money?Still a grudge, only to see false what u want and nothing less.6 -
OtarTheMad✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭OtarTheMad wrote: »OtarTheMad wrote: »I applaud them for trying. Maybe they can tweak some things and improve it.
they have tried that since 2014 and still this is maybe the worst try ever. and i really dont get them, are they still running the cheap version of server after they did cut them in 10 parts after the first year? or is it the code they use that are so bad? cause this is painful and reminds me of late 90's when online games tok off and we used 128bits phone connection.
I’m still happy they are trying to make Cyrodiil better. They can only really test on the live servers so it sucks when an idea doesn’t go well but I’d rather them keep trying then not.
Maybe they should start using some money on servers then? or hire better coders, cause they did fire those that did some real change and after that it did go south again.but yes i do want them to make pvp better. but are they ready to use the money?
Real question is can they. I am not sure what is going on behind the scenes but I do know that sometimes the corporate side of things can really hold you back and sometimes it forces you to take a longer path to get things done their way.
0 -
spartaxoxo✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭OtarTheMad wrote: »OtarTheMad wrote: »I applaud them for trying. Maybe they can tweak some things and improve it.
they have tried that since 2014 and still this is maybe the worst try ever. and i really dont get them, are they still running the cheap version of server after they did cut them in 10 parts after the first year? or is it the code they use that are so bad? cause this is painful and reminds me of late 90's when online games tok off and we used 128bits phone connection.
I’m still happy they are trying to make Cyrodiil better. They can only really test on the live servers so it sucks when an idea doesn’t go well but I’d rather them keep trying then not.
Maybe they should start using some money on servers then? or hire better coders, cause they did fire those that did some real change and after that it did go south again.but yes i do want them to make pvp better. but are they ready to use the money?
They literally just bought new servers...7 -
YetAnotherLinuxUser✭✭✭✭See i had no eso plus and only had cyrodil left to explore and then i saw the anouncement for testing and i bent backwards to find 16$ us so i could get some dlc access on this account to go skysharding and skillpointing fr my toons that need them. No way i want to be in cyrodil, even running inviso as a vamp with everyone there getting double exp points. not even as much as i want that exp too for skill level 6 and reviving barrier on my healers.0
-
flubber77✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »OtarTheMad wrote: »OtarTheMad wrote: »I applaud them for trying. Maybe they can tweak some things and improve it.
they have tried that since 2014 and still this is maybe the worst try ever. and i really dont get them, are they still running the cheap version of server after they did cut them in 10 parts after the first year? or is it the code they use that are so bad? cause this is painful and reminds me of late 90's when online games tok off and we used 128bits phone connection.
I’m still happy they are trying to make Cyrodiil better. They can only really test on the live servers so it sucks when an idea doesn’t go well but I’d rather them keep trying then not.
Maybe they should start using some money on servers then? or hire better coders, cause they did fire those that did some real change and after that it did go south again.but yes i do want them to make pvp better. but are they ready to use the money?
They literally just bought new servers...
yeah so they told, but is that server for 2023 standard or 2010? All i know is that this lag should not even be possible at this point. and server is not even fullStill a grudge, only to see false what u want and nothing less.2 -
Sakiri✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Heck even Square Enix had trouble getting hardware for ffxiv to open new servers, I don't expect there to be any to buy to upgrade with if yall insist on them upgrading them again.
Also I think OP doesn't understand that the point of a stress test is to break the server.8 -
Janni✭✭✭✭I think a lot of people are misunderstanding the word 'test'. Just because the performance is worse doesn't make it a failure. In fact the only way it CAN fail is if not info is gained at all. Even if performance tanks very valuable information can be gained from that. It's actually really common in software development to push things to the limit and measure the results just to see precisely what is causing the bottlenecks. It just sucks that they still haven't found a way to test this in-house. I mean, how hard is it to simulate the input of a couple hundred players? That sounds downright trivial to me when you consider some places simulate thousands or even millions of users and transactions.Edited by Janni on 6 December 2023 20:1419 -
Tommy_The_Gun✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Tbh. in order for Cyro to work on an acceptable level, they should lower the cap to 12 people per side, or 24 people per side with grouping disabled.
I know how it sounds, but well... it is just that bad. Even before the test it was bad during peak hours and especially if a Ball Group showed up. Seriously, Idk what it is about those groups, and how it is coded or what that groups are doing, but you can literally have 50 vs 50 vs 50 players fighting (or just 10 vs 10 vs 10), but once a ball group is near, you can simply tell it by how the game becomes unresponsive. They may not even be at the "render distance", so you don't see them yet, but you just know that they are near. And so far (at least for me) it has 100% accuracy.
I am not an expert, and I really don't want to upset players playing in groups in Cyro, but clearly, something is off when it comes to coding. I mean if you have like 40 - 50 players "zerg" all running to attack the keep, how they can cause less lag than 12 players that are grouped ? Is it synergy or healing they are constantly spamming that is causing more stress on the server ? idk. It is weird lol.Edited by Tommy_The_Gun on 6 December 2023 21:447 -
disintegr8✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
That's always been the case in Cyrodiil for me....Australian on PS4 NA server.
Everyone's entitled to an opinion.0 -
EdjeSwift✭✭✭✭✭
✭Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »Tbh. in order for Cyro to work on an acceptable level, they should lower the cap to 12 people per side, or 24 people per side with grouping disabled.
I know how it sounds, but well... it is just that bad. Even before the test it was bad during peak hours and especially if a Ball Group showed up. Seriously, Idk what it is about those groups, and how it is coded or what that groups are doing, but you can literally have 50 vs 50 vs 50 players fighting (or just 10 vs 10 vs 10), but once a ball group is near, you can simply tell it by how the game becomes unresponsive. They may not even be at the "render distance", so you don't see them yet, but you just know that they are near. And so far (at least for me) it has 100% accuracy.
I am not expert, and I rely don't want to upset players playing in groups in Cyro, but clearly, something is off when it comes to coding. I mean if you have like 40 - 50 players "zerg" all running to attack the keep, how they can cause less lag than 12 players that are grouped ? Is it synergy or healing they are constantly spamming that is causing more stress on the server ? idk. It is weird lol.
It's an APM/Calculation thing. What is a ball group doing? Constantly activating spells and synergies and spam casting and they're affecting the whole group practically, when you've got a large group doing this all at once in a concentrated area of course there's going to be performance issues. This is exacerbated by various procs and other checks having to be done. This is part of why ESO doesn't feel as smooth as it did before, there's so many more things to be processed and calculated at any given time. Look at the other performance complaints most of them involve combat in or around people or things which require large calculations and checks. Somewhere I feel like the code got overwhelmed by how many checks it has to do that it stutters.Antiquities Addict5 -
Tannus15✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭does anyone actually know what the potential outcome of these tests are?
is it to see if the servers can handle the pop cap increase or is it to gather data?2 -
Elsonso✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭does anyone actually know what the potential outcome of these tests are?
is it to see if the servers can handle the pop cap increase or is it to gather data?
Gather data. If I had to guess, today's patch included something server software that they want to test under load.
When they are done, I expect they will reset the cap back to where it was before the test.2 -
LouisaB75✭✭✭✭I have been playing in Cyro quite a lot over the last few days and I am not actually noticing that much difference with the lag. When a ball group hits and there are a lot of players in the area the lag seems to the same today as it was yesterday.3 -
virtus753✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »Tbh. in order for Cyro to work on an acceptable level, they should lower the cap to 12 people per side, or 24 people per side with grouping disabled.
I know how it sounds, but well... it is just that bad. Even before the test it was bad during peak hours and especially if a Ball Group showed up. Seriously, Idk what it is about those groups, and how it is coded or what that groups are doing, but you can literally have 50 vs 50 vs 50 players fighting (or just 10 vs 10 vs 10), but once a ball group is near, you can simply tell it by how the game becomes unresponsive. They may not even be at the "render distance", so you don't see them yet, but you just know that they are near. And so far (at least for me) it has 100% accuracy.
I am not expert, and I rely don't want to upset players playing in groups in Cyro, but clearly, something is off when it comes to coding. I mean if you have like 40 - 50 players "zerg" all running to attack the keep, how they can cause less lag than 12 players that are grouped ? Is it synergy or healing they are constantly spamming that is causing more stress on the server ? idk. It is weird lol.
It's an APM/Calculation thing. What is a ball group doing? Constantly activating spells and synergies and spam casting and they're affecting the whole group practically, when you've got a large group doing this all at once in a concentrated area of course there's going to be performance issues. This is exacerbated by various procs and other checks having to be done. This is part of why ESO doesn't feel as smooth as it did before, there's so many more things to be processed and calculated at any given time. Look at the other performance complaints most of them involve combat in or around people or things which require large calculations and checks. Somewhere I feel like the code got overwhelmed by how many checks it has to do that it stutters.
Which is also why optimized trials groups are suffering from similar symptoms - especially with the Azureblight bug rewarding groups for stacking it. Trash is a stuttery mess for me in many cases. Two nights ago I tried to cast Orb six times in a row (observing the GCD by watching Combat Metronome) in one trash fight in Sanity's Edge. Six times the image of the Orbs button depressed visually, and six times the skill failed to go off. The timer never started; the Orb never appeared. It felt like a faction stack in Cyrodiil.1 -
TechMaybeHic✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »Tbh. in order for Cyro to work on an acceptable level, they should lower the cap to 12 people per side, or 24 people per side with grouping disabled.
I know how it sounds, but well... it is just that bad. Even before the test it was bad during peak hours and especially if a Ball Group showed up. Seriously, Idk what it is about those groups, and how it is coded or what that groups are doing, but you can literally have 50 vs 50 vs 50 players fighting (or just 10 vs 10 vs 10), but once a ball group is near, you can simply tell it by how the game becomes unresponsive. They may not even be at the "render distance", so you don't see them yet, but you just know that they are near. And so far (at least for me) it has 100% accuracy.
I am not an expert, and I really don't want to upset players playing in groups in Cyro, but clearly, something is off when it comes to coding. I mean if you have like 40 - 50 players "zerg" all running to attack the keep, how they can cause less lag than 12 players that are grouped ? Is it synergy or healing they are constantly spamming that is causing more stress on the server ? idk. It is weird lol.
I almost expect the test to be a "data gathering" they use to shrink the scale of Cyrodiil. Not as small as battle grounds; but about what you mention. 20-ish per side.1 -
SaffronCitrusflower✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »Tbh. in order for Cyro to work on an acceptable level, they should lower the cap to 12 people per side, or 24 people per side with grouping disabled.
I know how it sounds, but well... it is just that bad. Even before the test it was bad during peak hours and especially if a Ball Group showed up. Seriously, Idk what it is about those groups, and how it is coded or what that groups are doing, but you can literally have 50 vs 50 vs 50 players fighting (or just 10 vs 10 vs 10), but once a ball group is near, you can simply tell it by how the game becomes unresponsive. They may not even be at the "render distance", so you don't see them yet, but you just know that they are near. And so far (at least for me) it has 100% accuracy.
I am not an expert, and I really don't want to upset players playing in groups in Cyro, but clearly, something is off when it comes to coding. I mean if you have like 40 - 50 players "zerg" all running to attack the keep, how they can cause less lag than 12 players that are grouped ? Is it synergy or healing they are constantly spamming that is causing more stress on the server ? idk. It is weird lol.
No. Just NO! By ZOS's own account the problem is less coding and more server capacity.
You're proposal/wish is that they essentially eliminate a foundational aspect of the game in favor of a PvE only ESO.
A much better idea would be to increase server capacity for the zone rather than skimping on what ZOS knows needs to happen to increase/restore Cyrodiil to something closer to what it used to be.
The "problem" is that end game PvP players and end game trials players tend to be high APM players that work the servers harder than the casual overland questing player by an exponential factor.
How would you feel about eliminating housing and companions so that we could bring back cyrodiil using the same server capacity we have today?Edited by SaffronCitrusflower on 6 December 2023 23:388
