AzraelKrieg wrote: »@ZOS_BrianWheeler Will this be for all systems and consoles?
All platforms.KILLING4ALIVING wrote: »@ZOS_BrianWheeler Will this apply to Imperial City as well?
Since IC is part of Cyrodiil, yes
PandaIsAPotato wrote: »Remove CP, return softcaps, k thx bai.
James-Wayne wrote: »ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »@MyNameIsElias We are aware of that behavior and will be adjusting values of Outposts, Resources and Keeps after the event.
Wait, why adjust it after? Why not with the event? Encourage us to test things other than 12k ticks.
But if there is enough people in the area of the flip doesn't it split that 6k up to everyone?
Nope. It's a base value.NightbladeMechanics wrote: »I feel like @Derra hasn't put much time into playing PvP without CP.
I also feel like he means that ZOS should have disabled all the passives and NOT the stat increases you obtain from individual stars to see how the passive/active components themselves contribute to lag separate from the stars.
That would be a correct proposal to make to improve ZOS' experiment, if that is indeed what he has been trying to articulate.
(I read through page 4. Forgive me if I missed a further development in this apparently circular conversation.)
Derra is a good player. I agree with him on this and with another thing he has said.
I've said this earlier and people are beginning to come in with the statements of "carried by CP". Anyone who has played both TF and Azura enough knows that players who perform well on either campaign perform well on the other.
Derra is also correct in that you can't trust the results of this test unless the outcome is that it is still laggy. You're not just hitting a switch and all of a sudden you have a controlled test environment. The "evidence" gathered during the test is going to be based on players playing completely differently from how they were before the test. If there is less lag you won't know if it was the play style changing or the CP passives (when you're trying to figure out if it's the CP passives). There are ways that players have for a long time advised to change the play style of PvP in an effort to reduce lag. Instead we get things like proxy det and barrier+purge nerfs. Just bandaids. The first "real" change they are proposing is to just shut off a game feature that the entire game (pvp included) is balanced around. For whatever reason this doesn't seem intelligent to me.
Edit: If the idea of the test is to see how non-cp affects campaigns like trueflame then that tells me already that they don't consider Azura's Star a good enough testing ground and that it doesn't see the type of action that you see on Trueflame. This is also true from my experiences playing on both. If you had two separate campaigns with different rule sets, equal populations (because pop caps), and different outcomes on server performance you would already have the necessary info to make any changes. Either this change is going to become permanent in the near future, or you can't say removing CP is why Azura performs better.
ComboBreaker88 wrote: »Xbox one NA server Azuras star is DEAD. Nobody goes in there. The server runs better BECAUSE it has a lower population. Lol
EU PC AZURA is full in primetime. No lag
ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »Hey gang!
As you saw in Matt’s 2017 roadmap, we are making Cyrodiil performance evaluation and fixing a priority this year. We want to make sure that Cyrodiil is a great PvP experience for everyone. Over the last year, we’ve made some good strides towards refining server performance across all campaigns, and we will continue down that path.
When looking into Cyrodiil issues, we definitely see (both in-game and through monitoring) situations where client and server performance degrade significantly when under high load. The small incremental changes we’ve made over the last year have helped, but they alone are not enough. So, we’re going to change our strategy a bit – which is the point of this post.
Simply put, Azura’s Star (the non-Champion Point campaign) runs much better, more efficiently, and is overall a much better PvP experience than the standard campaigns such as Trueflame or Haderus. Now that we’ve had a significant population density in Azura’s Star, we strongly suspect what has been theorized for a long time: Champion Rank passives and abilities are causing too much server load, especially in situations like Keep battles where there are tons of players in one place.
Because of this, we are going to run a series of PvP performance tests, and because it is impossible to simulate PvP load on our internal test servers (or on PTS), we will do this on all live servers on the dates of February 27 – March 6. This is not something we take lightly, and it is important that we evaluate performance when the server is under real-world load situations.
Our first test will be set up as follows:We encourage all players to continue their PvP activities in their respective Home, Guest, and Friends campaigns – we will be taking feedback and monitoring data on a daily basis during this test, and look forward to reading your constructive posts about server performance during the time of the test.
- For a period of one week, all Champion Points will be disabled on all Campaigns on all platforms and megaservers
- During this time, AP gains in all Campaigns will be doubled, both to compensate for lack of CP and also to incentivize players to PvP so we can record as much data as possible
- Campaign durations and leaderboards will not be adjusted during this week
The results of this test will determine the next course of action for refining Cyrodiil server performance. Thank you for your perseverance and patience – we thoroughly appreciate your time, efforts, and feedback!
Thanks again, and see you in Cyrodiil!
-Wheeler
James-Wayne wrote: »ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »@MyNameIsElias We are aware of that behavior and will be adjusting values of Outposts, Resources and Keeps after the event.
Wait, why adjust it after? Why not with the event? Encourage us to test things other than 12k ticks.
But if there is enough people in the area of the flip doesn't it split that 6k up to everyone?
Nope. It's a base value.NightbladeMechanics wrote: »I feel like @Derra hasn't put much time into playing PvP without CP.
I also feel like he means that ZOS should have disabled all the passives and NOT the stat increases you obtain from individual stars to see how the passive/active components themselves contribute to lag separate from the stars.
That would be a correct proposal to make to improve ZOS' experiment, if that is indeed what he has been trying to articulate.
(I read through page 4. Forgive me if I missed a further development in this apparently circular conversation.)
Derra is a good player. I agree with him on this and with another thing he has said.
I've said this earlier and people are beginning to come in with the statements of "carried by CP". Anyone who has played both TF and Azura enough knows that players who perform well on either campaign perform well on the other.
Derra is also correct in that you can't trust the results of this test unless the outcome is that it is still laggy. You're not just hitting a switch and all of a sudden you have a controlled test environment. The "evidence" gathered during the test is going to be based on players playing completely differently from how they were before the test. If there is less lag you won't know if it was the play style changing or the CP passives (when you're trying to figure out if it's the CP passives). There are ways that players have for a long time advised to change the play style of PvP in an effort to reduce lag. Instead we get things like proxy det and barrier+purge nerfs. Just bandaids. The first "real" change they are proposing is to just shut off a game feature that the entire game (pvp included) is balanced around. For whatever reason this doesn't seem intelligent to me.
Edit: If the idea of the test is to see how non-cp affects campaigns like trueflame then that tells me already that they don't consider Azura's Star a good enough testing ground and that it doesn't see the type of action that you see on Trueflame. This is also true from my experiences playing on both. If you had two separate campaigns with different rule sets, equal populations (because pop caps), and different outcomes on server performance you would already have the necessary info to make any changes. Either this change is going to become permanent in the near future, or you can't say removing CP is why Azura performs better.
By ''players playing completely differently'' do you mean not being able to spam skills due to resource management issue? In that case it should be evidence enough.
But the lag was there before CP. In fact 3 month from lunch is when it really started right when lots of skill hit max lv.
Finisherofwar wrote: »There is already a no cp campaign. I enjoy my campaign as it is and if I wanted to play no cp I'd join the campaign set up for that specifically.
As I see it what you're saying in this post is that since u don't know how to fix the lag in cp campaigns you're just going to completely take away that experience.
I'm not ok with this.
dwemer_paleologist wrote: »Finisherofwar wrote: »There is already a no cp campaign. I enjoy my campaign as it is and if I wanted to play no cp I'd join the campaign set up for that specifically.
As I see it what you're saying in this post is that since u don't know how to fix the lag in cp campaigns you're just going to completely take away that experience.
I'm not ok with this.
i agree with you.
this is a very touchy subject for many of us.
i believe that eso should be rebuilt. starting first with combat and how Pve and PvP works. and then go from there.
allow us to keep the current build and play with it untill they are done.
but that is not going to happen.
instead they just cut out entire builds and then let us deal with it.
saves money and keeps jobs.
VycDarkshadow wrote: »I love the hypocrisy of the playerbase sometimes.
"Fix PvP Lag!" (Zenimax discovers procs critting adds server lag, and fixes it) "Don't change things in PvP!"
"Fix PvP Lag!" (Zenimax tries a temporary, week-long idea) "Don't change things in PvP!"
I seriously think you people whine just for the sake of whining.
Finisherofwar wrote: »There is already a no cp campaign. I enjoy my campaign as it is and if I wanted to play no cp I'd join the campaign set up for that specifically.
As I see it what you're saying in this post is that since u don't know how to fix the lag in cp campaigns you're just going to completely take away that experience.
I'm not ok with this.
kyle.wilson wrote: »ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »Hey gang!
As you saw in Matt’s 2017 roadmap, we are making Cyrodiil performance evaluation and fixing a priority this year. We want to make sure that Cyrodiil is a great PvP experience for everyone. Over the last year, we’ve made some good strides towards refining server performance across all campaigns, and we will continue down that path.
When looking into Cyrodiil issues, we definitely see (both in-game and through monitoring) situations where client and server performance degrade significantly when under high load. The small incremental changes we’ve made over the last year have helped, but they alone are not enough. So, we’re going to change our strategy a bit – which is the point of this post.
Simply put, Azura’s Star (the non-Champion Point campaign) runs much better, more efficiently, and is overall a much better PvP experience than the standard campaigns such as Trueflame or Haderus. Now that we’ve had a significant population density in Azura’s Star, we strongly suspect what has been theorized for a long time: Champion Rank passives and abilities are causing too much server load, especially in situations like Keep battles where there are tons of players in one place.
Because of this, we are going to run a series of PvP performance tests, and because it is impossible to simulate PvP load on our internal test servers (or on PTS), we will do this on all live servers on the dates of February 27 – March 6. This is not something we take lightly, and it is important that we evaluate performance when the server is under real-world load situations.
Our first test will be set up as follows:We encourage all players to continue their PvP activities in their respective Home, Guest, and Friends campaigns – we will be taking feedback and monitoring data on a daily basis during this test, and look forward to reading your constructive posts about server performance during the time of the test.
- For a period of one week, all Champion Points will be disabled on all Campaigns on all platforms and megaservers
- During this time, AP gains in all Campaigns will be doubled, both to compensate for lack of CP and also to incentivize players to PvP so we can record as much data as possible
- Campaign durations and leaderboards will not be adjusted during this week
The results of this test will determine the next course of action for refining Cyrodiil server performance. Thank you for your perseverance and patience – we thoroughly appreciate your time, efforts, and feedback!
Thanks again, and see you in Cyrodiil!
-Wheeler
So, basically you are punishing players that have played since launch and accumulated CP. Azura Star runs fine because few people want to play it after it went CP free. Maybe if you offered this AP bonus only in AS, it would encourage people to play there.
Lets take it one step father, and force everyone in pvp into non-set white gear with no traits. Because apparently your programmers have no <snip> clue what they are doing.
Every patch recently has messed the game up.
What is your excuse now about why Azura Star's lag was so bad before CP were ever around. Last week it was proc sets. I guess the homestead patch proved that wrong. Remember AS was the lagfest before you changed the campaigns.