Joinovikova wrote: »

relentless_turnip wrote: »

I don't want to get too excited, as normally a week after maintenance it seems to get really bad again.

However when I joined the queue at primetime i was 81st in the queue, but everything worked basically perfectly from the moment I got into cyrodill! I had the odd dip where a skill would miss but otherwise great!

What are everyone else's experiences since the group changes were implemented?

Tuesday night it got laggy when ballgroups were up, but fine once they logged out.

If they also implement CD on AOE if you are in group more than 4 members this game will be great ...

I think this would be too much, there would be better ways to reduce the effectiveness of a ballgroup without completely killing group play.

Perhaps stopping heals like rapid regen from stacking on people. Meaning you could only have one source of rapid regen on you at a time.
A healer would need to cycle heals to be effective and ballgroups would be severely crippled by this change.

Maybe the server could have a protective system built in where it detects ballgroup activity and applies cooldowns and ramping costs to those meeting the criteria.

Performance is terrible, but better than last patch. That is my final conclusion, it is totally unacceptable but less so than last patch. The lag in cyrodill is less, but still completely terrible.

BGs actually lag in this patch, which I never experienced before...

This game one year a go was incredible. Even up to February this year cyrodill worked well enough for the ambitious nature of it.
I am not blaming the developers I genuinely think they care about this game. Unlike many of the posts I read I think they know exactly how to fix it. Because they know exactly what broke it, but their hands are tied.

I am blame the investors for making greedy decisions to incorporate a new platform that meant forcing everything server side and ruining performance for all existing platforms to honour what I can only imagine was a very lucrative contract. I blame them for not giving the developers the freedom and the resources to improve a game that is incredibly successful. It would be much more so if it worked as it used to.

I actually have no doubt if the changes in harrowstorm had never occurred the game would be running incredibly well. I have no doubt we would be praising the "the year of performance".

Recently Matt made a statement regarding zos's decision to not make a working version for future Mac's. While i totally agree with that decision, I do not agree with the language he used and believe what came across is that he does not see any substantial longevity in this game. He referred to it as old and I got the impression they did not think it was worth the investment.