Campaign Performance

PainfulFAFA

Huckdabuck wrote: »

WTB pre-lighting patch private server to PvP on. This garbage heap that's live right now is just.........freaking sad.

And Devs that left ZoS for greener pastures reportedly said they were "happy with the direction of the game"

And devs that are still with zos keep saying they'll be fixing it bit by bit which we all know takes anywhere between 2-6 months. By the time they do fix it'll be dead....

Alcast

ZOS said it is ""not"" the lighting patch. So IF they already know wtf causes fps drops why do they not fix it then?

Saying it isn't lightning patch but when the patch got applied to the servers, we got huge mofo FPS drops to 0 is just *** ridiculous.

Keep removing deers to "improve" server performance, I still laugh my ass off on that one.

Septimus_Magna

Alcast wrote: »

ZOS said it is ""not"" the lighting patch. So IF they already know wtf causes fps drops why do they not fix it then?

Saying it isn't lightning patch but when the patch got applied to the servers, we got huge mofo FPS drops to 0 is just *** ridiculous.

Keep removing deers to "improve" server performance, I still laugh my ass off on that one.

From what I understood is that the lightning changes itself didnt mess much up, it was all the other stuff in this patch that was pushed from the server to client-side that reduced performance in Cyrodiil.

Enodoc

Septimus_Magna wrote: »

show previous quotes

Alcast wrote: »

ZOS said it is ""not"" the lighting patch. So IF they already know wtf causes fps drops why do they not fix it then?

Saying it isn't lightning patch but when the patch got applied to the servers, we got huge mofo FPS drops to 0 is just *** ridiculous.

Keep removing deers to "improve" server performance, I still laugh my ass off on that one.

From what I understood is that the lightning changes itself didnt mess much up, it was all the other stuff in this patch that was pushed from the server to client-side that reduced performance in Cyrodiil.

Maybe that was part of it, but Brian said that the primary issue was the number of players who started unlocking process-heavy skills at about the same time as the lighting patch. Not sure whether I totally believe that, but it is definitely true that some of the higher-level skills have more particle and animation effects than the lower-level ones, and many of them require LoS checks, which would both add a lot of load to server requests.

Huckdabuck

Enodoc wrote: »

show previous quotes

Septimus_Magna wrote: »

Alcast wrote: »

ZOS said it is ""not"" the lighting patch. So IF they already know wtf causes fps drops why do they not fix it then?

Saying it isn't lightning patch but when the patch got applied to the servers, we got huge mofo FPS drops to 0 is just *** ridiculous.

Keep removing deers to "improve" server performance, I still laugh my ass off on that one.

From what I understood is that the lightning changes itself didnt mess much up, it was all the other stuff in this patch that was pushed from the server to client-side that reduced performance in Cyrodiil.

Maybe that was part of it, but Brian said that the primary issue was the number of players who started unlocking process-heavy skills at about the same time as the lighting patch. Not sure whether I totally believe that, but it is definitely true that some of the higher-level skills have more particle and animation effects than the lower-level ones, and many of them require LoS checks, which would both add a lot of load to server requests.

All I can say is that we would have seen a gradual curve with the FPS/lag issues if you were to believe his explanation instead of an instant and overnight total nosedive of FPS/lag issues as we did with that patch. So if you ask me.....ZOS (et al) is completely inept and they think we are all complete idiots.

Joy_Division

Enodoc wrote: »

show previous quotes

Septimus_Magna wrote: »

Alcast wrote: »

ZOS said it is ""not"" the lighting patch. So IF they already know wtf causes fps drops why do they not fix it then?

Saying it isn't lightning patch but when the patch got applied to the servers, we got huge mofo FPS drops to 0 is just *** ridiculous.

Keep removing deers to "improve" server performance, I still laugh my ass off on that one.

From what I understood is that the lightning changes itself didnt mess much up, it was all the other stuff in this patch that was pushed from the server to client-side that reduced performance in Cyrodiil.

Maybe that was part of it, but Brian said that the primary issue was the number of players who started unlocking process-heavy skills at about the same time as the lighting patch. Not sure whether I totally believe that, but it is definitely true that some of the higher-level skills have more particle and animation effects than the lower-level ones, and many of them require LoS checks, which would both add a lot of load to server requests.

Doesn't explain why the game was playable the day before the patch released.

Starshadw

Enodoc wrote: »

Maybe that was part of it, but Brian said that the primary issue was the number of players who started unlocking process-heavy skills at about the same time as the lighting patch. Not sure whether I totally believe that, but it is definitely true that some of the higher-level skills have more particle and animation effects than the lower-level ones, and many of them require LoS checks, which would both add a lot of load to server requests.

Yep.

I don't think it can be overstated just how much certain AOE skills that don't get unlocked until characters are higher levels are affecting things. Anyone who takes a lowbie into BWB can attest that the lag is nigh nonexistent there - and the lighting changes are active in that campaign just as they are in the vet campaigns. BWB is the one campaign left where my Aussie and New Zealand guildies can still enjoy PvP. All of the vet campaigns, even the "lower pop" ones, are so laggy for them they are unplayable.

So while the lighting changes may exacerbate what's going on, they cannot be pointed to as the primary culprit or "magic bullet" that, if they were removed, would solve the problem.

MisterBigglesworth

When this game was first released there were so many holes in their netcode that the client (meaning your game installed on your computer) could basically do whatever the hell it wanted and the server would just, ya know, "take your word for it". Oh you want to dupe gold and mats? Sure, why not! I'm just the server, I don't need to check on these things! Oh, you're a bot program that makes characters fly around at 500mph under the ground and through walls? Have it, client! I trust everything you say!

and then...

Patch 1.2.3...

Famously known as the "lighting patch"...

Changed all that. Suddenly server checks (which should have been built right into the game from the beginning, but weren't because lack of foresight and a lack of experience developing MMOs) were added as an afterthought to a game whose large-scale PvP performance depended upon offloading most of the work to the client.

Basically ZOS cut corners with their netcode in order to have "hundreds of players on screen" as a selling point, and it came back to bite them.

Islyn

AbraXuSeXile wrote: »

show previous quotes

Bashev wrote: »

AbraXuSeXile wrote: »

All you got to do is look at what you changed in 1.2.3, this was where it all went wrong.

Latency and FPS was flawless before then.

Brian answered this question in the last ESO live. He said that they investigated the lightening patch and they concluded that there is no issues with it. The problem with the performance is noticeable around 1.2.3 because most of the players reached high rank at that time and more passive should be calculated.

Its a lie, i was running a train before 1.2.3 getting into 3 way fights with other trains. No lag.

lighting patch gave us weeks of issues and never recovered, when they fixed fps the latency was broke.

100% agree. This put the nail in the coffin on a few campaigns in PC NA, where you just couldn't do ANYTHING. Wabbalag was what we called Wabbajack from then....

Huckdabuck

MisterBigglesworth wrote: »

When this game was first released there were so many holes in their netcode that the client (meaning your game installed on your computer) could basically do whatever the hell it wanted and the server would just, ya know, "take your word for it". Oh you want to dupe gold and mats? Sure, why not! I'm just the server, I don't need to check on these things! Oh, you're a bot program that makes characters fly around at 500mph under the ground and through walls? Have it, client! I trust everything you say!

and then...

Patch 1.2.3...

Famously known as the "lighting patch"...

Changed all that. Suddenly server checks (which should have been built right into the game from the beginning, but weren't because lack of foresight and a lack of experience developing MMOs) were added as an afterthought to a game whose large-scale PvP performance depended upon offloading most of the work to the client.

Basically ZOS cut corners with their netcode in order to have "hundreds of players on screen" as a selling point, and it came back to bite them.

Winner winner chicken dinner!

Sallington

MisterBigglesworth wrote: »

When this game was first released there were so many holes in their netcode that the client (meaning your game installed on your computer) could basically do whatever the hell it wanted and the server would just, ya know, "take your word for it". Oh you want to dupe gold and mats? Sure, why not! I'm just the server, I don't need to check on these things! Oh, you're a bot program that makes characters fly around at 500mph under the ground and through walls? Have it, client! I trust everything you say!

and then...

Patch 1.2.3...

Famously known as the "lighting patch"...

Changed all that. Suddenly server checks (which should have been built right into the game from the beginning, but weren't because lack of foresight and a lack of experience developing MMOs) were added as an afterthought to a game whose large-scale PvP performance depended upon offloading most of the work to the client.

Basically ZOS cut corners with their netcode in order to have "hundreds of players on screen" as a selling point, and it came back to bite them.

/dropsmic

100% correct

Lord-Stien

So........ anymore updates from the Dev's and Such ?....

@ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_BrianWheeler

Would love some more info.... When you guys and Gal's have a Some time From your hecktick work load..

Much Love,.....(NO ***)

ZOS_BrianWheeler

We have some adjustments coming to the ability system in terms of how it handles requirements, cost evaluations, and some further optimizations on the server with handling temporary storage of these messages. These changes however are far reaching into the combat system at it's roots, and is taking a bit longer to do as it takes a combination of server work and data changes.

Efaritay

Thanks for the update @ZOS_BrianWheeler. Any news on a timescale? or if these changes will be on PTS first?

WebBull

If "it's not the lighting" then figure out what other changes you made in that lighting patch. It WAS that patch. That was the beginning of the end.

Starshadw

WebBull wrote: »

If "it's not the lighting" then figure out what other changes you made in that lighting patch. It WAS that patch. That was the beginning of the end.

Once again, if this were true, then BWB would be as laggy as the vet campaigns, and it's not. This is not to say that the changes implemented in this patch aren't having an effect - but we need to stop pointing at it as though it's THE culprit, when it's clearly not the only thing going on here.

ZOS_BrianWheeler

Lighting would effect your client and not the server, and that's what these changes are focused on.

Frenkthevile

+1 i can remember PERFECTLY that the night the ''lightning patch'' went online, my whole guild stopped having fun in Cyrodil.

Cinbri

65 MBit/sec fiber inet.
After 1 january ESO transformed for me into this every day:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeIClJC5u8k
I don't have such problems in other games, like Black Desert. So should i just forget about ESO?

Niaver

Cinbri wrote: »

65 MBit/sec fiber inet.
After 1 january ESO transformed for me into this every day:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeIClJC5u8k
I don't have such problems in other games, like Black Desert. So should i just forget about ESO?

Here we go. I also have this issue. Their customer support says to me that this is because of my GPU card... xD

Cinbri

Niaver wrote: »

show previous quotes

Cinbri wrote: »

65 MBit/sec fiber inet.
After 1 january ESO transformed for me into this every day:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeIClJC5u8k
I don't have such problems in other games, like Black Desert. So should i just forget about ESO?

Here we go. I also have this issue. Their customer support says to me that this is because of my GPU card... xD

Tried to port on locked Azura just for fun - got disconnect at the same second, doubt GPU has anything with it.

Ezareth

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Lighting would effect your client and not the server, and that's what these changes are focused on.

@ZOS_BrianWheeler

I just want to say thanks for remaining positive and keeping communications open with the grumpy PvP community we are. I enjoyed and agreed with your whiteboard demonstration on the last ESO live.

What I don't understand is why the game appears to be lagging outside of the zergs recently. This can't be so much of a "Too much happening in a general area" lag that you described as much as something else reducing performance in general.

For instance why does the game lag *at all* in vMSA? It's a tiny PvE scripted instance...the game should (and used to) run absolutely flawless in any PvE I've experienced in the past. The same is true in Cyrodiil when a campaign is completely dead. I was dueling at 5AM on a dead campaign the other night and the controls, weapon swapping, ability firing etc was just sluggish and unresponsive.

Do you have any information on the cause or nature of these underlying issues and why it appears to have been added on top of the old existing "zerg" lag in cyrodiil?

MisterBigglesworth

Ezareth wrote: »

For instance why does the game lag *at all* in vMSA? It's a tiny PvE scripted instance...the game should (and used to) run absolutely flawless in any PvE I've experienced in the past. The same is true in Cyrodiil when a campaign is completely dead. I was dueling at 5AM on a dead campaign the other night and the controls, weapon swapping, ability firing etc was just sluggish and unresponsive.

For the reasons I explained above. This was a major change to the entire game's handling of client-server communications, in order to prevent/minimze botting.

You yourself were mistakenly banned for "hacking the game to create movement not otherwise permitted by in game mechanics". What patch did that occur in?

ZOS_BrianWheeler

For Cyrodiil the answer is simply that it's one zone and if anything floods the server with requests from that zone, regardless of where it occurred in the zone, will effect the entire zone. There may have been a battle at Alessia bridge, but it could effect what happens at Fort Warden.

Grunim

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

For Cyrodiil the answer is simply that it's one zone and if anything floods the server with requests from that zone, regardless of where it occurred in the zone, will effect the entire zone. There may have been a battle at Alessia bridge, but it could effect what happens at Fort Warden.

Sounds like it's time to blow up the bridge then. *Whistles the Bridge on the River Kwai song while laying down the explosives*

Taonnor

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

For Cyrodiil the answer is simply that it's one zone and if anything floods the server with requests from that zone, regardless of where it occurred in the zone, will effect the entire zone. There may have been a battle at Alessia bridge, but it could effect what happens at Fort Warden.

So you say Cyrodiil is not splitted in zones for the LOS check?

Could "Zone Splitting" help? I have described zone splitting in theory at my "Myth AoE Cap" post. @ZOS_BrianWheeler

-> http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/224997/myth-aoe-cap/p1

Taonnor wrote: »

Cyrodiil Zone Splitting

I can only observe from outside how Zenimax LOS checks implemented. Fact is, the server needs to know which enemy players are at the time of AoE damage in range of that AoE. Now the question is how we get this infornation?

Suppose Cyrodiil is a single instance, then the server must determine which enemy players were at the time of AoE's from player A in the reach of that AoE. Gets the server now the position of all enemy players in Cyrodiil and checks it? Or is there another method?

If zone splitting is not active, then the server searches completely Cyrodiil. In my simulation I have set the value to 500 objects.

If zone splitting is active, then Cyrodiil is divided into small boxes (zones). Thus, the server does not need to search complete Cyrodiil. The server only needs to search the objects in the zone of the AoE damage occurred. If the AoE reaches over zone boundaries all bordering areas are searched. So I would do it. In the simulation, which has the consequence that only the enemies of the other group to be searched.

Depending on how large the zones are, the number of LOS checks can be massively reduced (theoretically) on a filled Cyrodiil server. That's like saying a process that I would apply. But what system implemented that only knows Zenimax itself.

Taonnor wrote: »

I can not help but I have to remark this! I think Zenimax has implemented the global variant without zone splitting or has made the zones too large. I hope you can still remind the removing of deer? Deer can also meet with an AoE. Like guards or other animals. Against all these objects a LOS check has to be done, because you do not want to hit the wolf on the other side of Cyrodiil with an AoE. So i found the myth reason of the deer removings!? @ZOS_GinaBruno

timidobserver

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

For Cyrodiil the answer is simply that it's one zone and if anything floods the server with requests from that zone, regardless of where it occurred in the zone, will effect the entire zone. There may have been a battle at Alessia bridge, but it could effect what happens at Fort Warden.

The ridiculous suggestion of the day would be to put a roaming instance around all ball groups. That way the lag stays in their personal instance and everybody outside of it is unaffected. Impossible I know, but it would be nice.

Xarc

can u explain why we have sometimes loading screen > 1min everytime we die or try to TP to another shrine ? It is impossible to defend or follow a group with 1min or more delay

Ezareth

MisterBigglesworth wrote: »

show previous quotes

Ezareth wrote: »

For instance why does the game lag *at all* in vMSA? It's a tiny PvE scripted instance...the game should (and used to) run absolutely flawless in any PvE I've experienced in the past. The same is true in Cyrodiil when a campaign is completely dead. I was dueling at 5AM on a dead campaign the other night and the controls, weapon swapping, ability firing etc was just sluggish and unresponsive.

For the reasons I explained above. This was a major change to the entire game's handling of client-server communications, in order to prevent/minimze botting.

You yourself were mistakenly banned for "hacking the game to create movement not otherwise permitted by in game mechanics". What patch did that occur in?

I know moving a lot of things from the client to server side impacted the performance of PvP back in 1.2 or 1.3. I was banned early in 1.6 and it was primarily because I had a raid of players reporting me daily for "hacking" because their leader couldn't accept that I was beating them fairly.

When I switched to my Nightblade in 1.6 the game ran *flawlessly* for me in any PvE dungeon or instance or zone unless I was having problems with my connection. This was the primary reason that I enjoyed my nightblade so much and especially cracked wood cave because I could PvP in there with flawless response times and could count on everything just working. Either in 1.7 (2.1) or later that stopped being the case. I don't know whether they've shrunk the server cluster or the number of players has grown significantly but things are now lagging in areas where before I'd never seen it.

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

For Cyrodiil the answer is simply that it's one zone and if anything floods the server with requests from that zone, regardless of where it occurred in the zone, will effect the entire zone. There may have been a battle at Alessia bridge, but it could effect what happens at Fort Warden.

Thanks for the explanation @ZOS_BrianWheeler . I will say however at this point in time and throughout when I noticed I was getting sluggish responses I kept checking the map and there were no crossed sword indicating any major fight. I suppose it is possible there was a raid of players spamming healing springs somewhere or something but that would be highly unlikely. I only noted it because it was the first time I was reasonably certain that nothing was going on in the whole campaign other than the 5 or so duels between two players and maybe 10 other players standing around watching.

Starshadw

Ezareth wrote: »

Either in 1.7 (2.1) or later that stopped being the case. I don't know whether they've shrunk the server cluster or the number of players has grown significantly but things are now lagging in areas where before I'd never seen it.

Less that the number of players has grown overall, and more that they continue to close campaigns, thus further compressing the PvP population. So now, the lag is showing up everywhere because we're all crammed onto fewer campaigns.