With double AP and lack of "toxic cancer" builds. I would say more players are in Cyrodiil than what would normally be the case. Its also worth noting that they brought back faction wide healing, which in combination with constant population locked instances, produces a lot of calculations for the servers, making us not notice really much change in performance at all, if not down right worse. I did feel like performance was better the first day of the testing but that was in the middle of the day and we were not pop locked. In giant zergs with AoE and "smart targeting" heals being thrown everywhere that quickly changed for the worse as we all know.

I don't think there's anything they can do to fix lag, aside from moving all calculations to be client side, instead of server side like it was few years ago.

However they will hit the same problem there was then. Cheaters. Crap ton of them.

Just give cyro the imperial city treatment.
Slice it into 4 to 8 zones.

Won't happen and they also won't recode stuff. We can just hope 1 day the kill cyro and come up with something else to replace it.

BTW, loved cyro pvp on release (performance wise). Got worse with each patch and each "let's move all of this to the server cause we have no reliable cheat protection".

Put more stuff back on client and hand out hardware bans to cheaters which manipulate client-side stored stuff.

Servers clearly can't handle the positioning, the dumb block change and various other stuff. Put it back to client-side.

Even new servers won't fix this. If the coding asks for to many checks no server will ever handle it. Clean that mess up pls.

actosh wrote: »

Just give cyro the imperial city treatment.
Slice it into 4 to 8 zones.

Won't happen and they also won't recode stuff. We can just hope 1 day the kill cyro and come up with something else to replace it.

BTW, loved cyro pvp on release (performance wise). Got worse with each patch and each "let's move all of this to the server cause we have no reliable cheat protection".

Put more stuff back on client and hand out hardware bans to cheaters which manipulate client-side stored stuff.

Servers clearly can't handle the positioning, the dumb block change and various other stuff. Put it back to client-side.

Even new servers won't fix this. If the coding asks for to many checks no server will ever handle it. Clean that mess up pls.

Yeah, at this point I think the most realistic solution would be for them to just turn cyrodiil into a pvm zone and introduce a new format for pvp. I've loved cyrodiil since launch too, but it's been way too long since pvp was actually playable and enjoyable in there. If they won't do what is necessary to fix the issues, they should pursue an alternate solution.

They re-enabled cross healing and took away a lot of faction stack counterplay so thats why the game lags more now.
@CSose

CSose wrote: »

Liam12548 wrote: »

Aerenthir wrote: »

I don't think there's anything they can do to fix lag, aside from moving all calculations to be client side, instead of server side like it was few years ago.

However they will hit the same problem there was then. Cheaters. Crap ton of them.

There are a lot of people that believe the calculations that were moved server side are the main cause of the lag. I'd like to see them run a test where they move a ton of these back to the client to see what happens.

At the end of the day, what is worse: Cyrodiil being completley unplayable all the time for everyone because of the lag, or cheaters ruining the experience for small groups of people over short periods of time until they get banned?

I'd happily take 20 meteors in a row from some dude flying 30 meters above my head once a day if it meant I could go into cyrodiil and enjoy lag free pvp again.

I agree. But, from ZOS perspective, that is time and money for someone to police the cheaters.

aint even gonna lie, I think it would be a lot of effort to forge packets and try and cheat if the changes to client server were reverted. I don't think they would have to employ anyone to catch cheaters, ultimately metrics over time would be telling.

i think a total re-work of the code from TCP to UDP (suing RTP and application layer confirm where needed) would be the greatest improvement in performance.

virtus753 wrote: »

Oakenaxe wrote: »

Papa Bill could invest on some expensive best-tech servers for ZOS now that Microsoft owns them. I'll ask him.

The deal was only approved by EU regulators today (March 5). Just because two companies agree on a buyout doesn’t mean one owns the other just yet.

Then there’s the fact that MS has said everything will be run the same as before, and ZOS has said they’re replacing the servers this year but expect no performance increases as a result.

Not looking good for the hardware angle.

that bloody, "were replacing the server hardware... No improvement expected"... WTF ZOS? They get a deal on some TSR-80's?

Seriously, shouldn't we expect some perf improvements on newer hardware 9particualrly as the server side seems to be the issue)? perhaps it's time to improve on the hacked up HERO engine, no?

inB4 '"ESO doesn't run on the HERO engine"