Maintenance for the week of December 23:
· [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 14:00 UTC (9:00AM EST)
· [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 14:00 UTC (9:00AM EST)
Should ZOS lower the population cap on campaigns?
-
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭No, keep it the way it is and wait 5 more years for the fix that may never come.SkysOutThizeOut wrote: »Strong debuffs for either faction stacking raids would force multiple large scale battle at multiple locations because raids are generally smart and multiple attacks at once would increase efficiency and success for a keep to be captured. Same could be way Raids will defend.
I really think you need to read what Joy posted, explaining why this is not a good idea for Zos to consider. It is in line with what I stated earlier, that you are putting a burden on player to run around counting how many are in the area before bothering to engage. In the end, once they finish counting the numbers have changed.
Anyone who thinks this through will come to a similar conclusion.
Because the game can not count the numbers for you and put that number on your screen. And once that number is on one persons screen they can't announce it in zone chat. Computers are not calculators they can not do arithmetic for you!
So you want the servers to handle another load for everyone in Cyrodiil and constantly update that. Of course that will not put an additional load on the servers with the constant that constant calculation per player. This make for a perfect solution to possibly make lag even worse.
Obviously this cannot be calculated client side since the client cannot see who all is in the area. Everyone must be accounted for even if they cannot be seen. It is these little details that derail many thoughts on fixes.0 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭No, keep it the way it is and wait 5 more years for the fix that may never come.The Uninvited wrote: »The Uninvited wrote: »The Uninvited wrote: »Again? Nah, it's the concentration of zergs in one spot combined with all the calculations of CP for all these players. Fix should be found in the CP calculations.
It has already been demonstrated CP does not affect lag. Zos did a test close to 2 years ago and removed all CP from all campaigns and lag still persisted.
I am surprised someone would still claim this is an issue after what seemed to be a decisive test.
A decisive test of which they NEVER published the results?
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/323521/cyrodiil-performance-test-and-double-ap-event/p1
Edit: You also left out the part where I said "it's the concentration of zergs in one spot combined with all the calculations"
They have no need to publish detailed data. We are not entitled to it. Clearly, they would not have gone to such an extreme if there were not willing to act on the data. This comment I quoted is just a desperate attempt and grasping at straws.
They have done worse and you know it. Don't give me that crap.
LOL. So they go through a lot of effort to test a theory that could fix lag in Cyrodiil and ignore the results. That makes sense.
Also, lag was present before CP so do not give me that crap that CP was somehow a fix, Zos tested it and lied to us about it's effects..Edited by idk on December 20, 2018 9:06PM0 -
Ruckly✭✭✭✭Other, list suggestion below.SkysOutThizeOut wrote: »Strong debuffs for either faction stacking raids would force multiple large scale battle at multiple locations because raids are generally smart and multiple attacks at once would increase efficiency and success for a keep to be captured. Same could be way Raids will defend.
I really think you need to read what Joy posted, explaining why this is not a good idea for Zos to consider. It is in line with what I stated earlier, that you are putting a burden on player to run around counting how many are in the area before bothering to engage. In the end, once they finish counting the numbers have changed.
Anyone who thinks this through will come to a similar conclusion.
Because the game can not count the numbers for you and put that number on your screen. And once that number is on one persons screen they can't announce it in zone chat. Computers are not calculators they can not do arithmetic for you!
So you want the servers to handle another load for everyone in Cyrodiil and constantly update that. Of course that will not put an additional load on the servers with the constant that constant calculation per player. This make for a perfect solution to possibly make lag even worse.
Obviously this cannot be calculated client side since the client cannot see who all is in the area. Everyone must be accounted for even if they cannot be seen. It is these little details that derail many thoughts on fixes.
The servers must be total dog crap if they cannot do simple arithmetic my phone can do. They can count the siege at a fort but behold counting players around a fort no way server load would be astronomical. The data would explode at an exponential rate and disrupt the space-time continuum. I'm sure an employee can donate a phone to do this calculation. I'm sure just about anyone can donate a phone to do this calculation.
This might be(the post quoted) the post of the year for these forums. The server is a shoe box with wires plugged into it.Edited by Ruckly on December 20, 2018 10:41PM0 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭No, keep it the way it is and wait 5 more years for the fix that may never come.SkysOutThizeOut wrote: »Strong debuffs for either faction stacking raids would force multiple large scale battle at multiple locations because raids are generally smart and multiple attacks at once would increase efficiency and success for a keep to be captured. Same could be way Raids will defend.
I really think you need to read what Joy posted, explaining why this is not a good idea for Zos to consider. It is in line with what I stated earlier, that you are putting a burden on player to run around counting how many are in the area before bothering to engage. In the end, once they finish counting the numbers have changed.
Anyone who thinks this through will come to a similar conclusion.
Because the game can not count the numbers for you and put that number on your screen. And once that number is on one persons screen they can't announce it in zone chat. Computers are not calculators they can not do arithmetic for you!
So you want the servers to handle another load for everyone in Cyrodiil and constantly update that. Of course that will not put an additional load on the servers with the constant that constant calculation per player. This make for a perfect solution to possibly make lag even worse.
Obviously this cannot be calculated client side since the client cannot see who all is in the area. Everyone must be accounted for even if they cannot be seen. It is these little details that derail many thoughts on fixes.
The servers must be total dog crap if they cannot do simple arithmetic my phone can do. They can count the siege at a fort but behold counting players around a fort no way server load would be astronomical. The data would explode at an exponential rate and disrupt the space-time continuum. I'm sure an employee can donate a phone to do this calculation. I'm sure just about anyone can donate a phone to do this calculation.
You really seem to not understand what you are talking about which is why you choose such melodramatic responses.
First, your phone cannot determine who is in the area with you. Pretty confident your phone fails in that department.
Second, your phone cannot determine who is in the area with you and 60 other people at the same time and recount every few seconds.
Third, you also fail to take into consideration that the server then needs to calculate the suggested debuff. Your phone cannot do that for 60 people and refresh it constantly.
This is even more so since the issue is clearly something server side. One does not reduce the load server load by adding more server load. Logic is the basis of computing. Even on your phone.
So you can say all you want about that but your phone clearly fails When you can reply with actual information vs big drama the I will comment back. Until then keep up with the useless and incorrect dramatic responses.Edited by idk on December 20, 2018 10:45PM0 -
Delsskia✭✭✭✭Other, list suggestion below.Y'all, this is really pretty basic stuff. There are many reasons for lag, one of the biggies is that the game engine/spaghetti code/server combo platter can't handle all of the calculations that they're already doing. Asking to introduce more calculations into that mix would only serve to exacerbate the problem.
I think flying cars are a cool idea, they'd be awesome until you packed 15,000,000 of them into New York City and started doing the body counts. Similarly, you can't take an interesting twist on the game, pull it completely out of it's practical context and proclaim it as fabulous. The reality is that adding more calculations into what is already an overload is just a bad idea.
NA-PC
Fantasia1 -
Ruckly✭✭✭✭Other, list suggestion below.Y'all, this is really pretty basic stuff. There are many reasons for lag, one of the biggies is that the game engine/spaghetti code/server combo platter can't handle all of the calculations that they're already doing. Asking to introduce more calculations into that mix would only serve to exacerbate the problem.
I think flying cars are a cool idea, they'd be awesome until you packed 15,000,000 of them into New York City and started doing the body counts. Similarly, you can't take an interesting twist on the game, pull it completely out of it's practical context and proclaim it as fabulous. The reality is that adding more calculations into what is already an overload is just a bad idea.
The server already knows how many players there are and where they are because it has to. For the server to calculate the number of a specific faction within a radius around a keep all it has to do is the same thing it does anyways except localize it. The server probably already does this anyways for optimization because it is a very very small calculation. Relaying that information is a very very small amount of data. A number. This might take up 500 transistors? Relaying that information every 5 seconds to clients in a radius is sending a number(a byte of data) down the pipeline to those players. The notion that this overloads the server is an insult to the server. It can't possibly be that bad.0 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭No, keep it the way it is and wait 5 more years for the fix that may never come.Y'all, this is really pretty basic stuff. There are many reasons for lag, one of the biggies is that the game engine/spaghetti code/server combo platter can't handle all of the calculations that they're already doing. Asking to introduce more calculations into that mix would only serve to exacerbate the problem.
I think flying cars are a cool idea, they'd be awesome until you packed 15,000,000 of them into New York City and started doing the body counts. Similarly, you can't take an interesting twist on the game, pull it completely out of it's practical context and proclaim it as fabulous. The reality is that adding more calculations into what is already an overload is just a bad idea.
The server already knows how many players there are and where they are because it has to. For the server to calculate the number of a specific faction within a radius around a keep all it has to do is the same thing it does anyways except localize it. The server probably already does this anyways for optimization because it is a very very small calculation. Relaying that information is a very very small amount of data. A number. This might take up 500 transistors? Relaying that information every 5 seconds to clients in a radius is sending a number(a byte of data) down the pipeline to those players. The notion that this overloads the server is an insult to the server. It can't possibly be that bad.
The server does not already know how many players are within x meters of each and every player and continuously recalculating it.
For 200 players in Cyrodiil that count would have to be made 200x for each time interval set. Then the appropriate neft to their buffs/debuffs would need to be calculated.
You merely guess at what it would take but the fact of the matter you do not have a clue. Measuring it by transistors and guessing how many it would take demonstrates that clearly.
Even when talking about server load this would cause, you must first look at if there would be a corresponding decrease in server load and what that is to determine if there is a net benefit. At what point there is any benefit for starters, if that ever occurs. Considering Players tend to go where they want it is still more likely not care resulting in this merely adding to the server load without any benefit thereby making the situation worse.Edited by idk on December 20, 2018 11:43PM1 -
Delsskia✭✭✭✭Other, list suggestion below.You can't pull a piece of the original suggestion out of context, make up some random numbers that make you feel better about it and then use your alternative facts to proclaim how great the idea is. Reality still wins out. The suggestion was to nerf some people for simply being where the action is. That isn't just a matter of running an algorithm to discover population density within a given radius.
It would also require gathering data on everyone's sets, proc chances, stats, CP, racial bonuses, poisons, weapon damage, spell damage, penetration, critical chance, critical resist, armor values, class passives, guild passives, food buffs, potion buffs/debuffs, etc. which the game already does. But then apply all of the variables to secondary and tertiary calls within the code to determine whether or not to apply the debuff based on where the player is standing. Once the determination is made, then it has to actually apply the debuff, or not.
And since PvP is a very fast paced environment with constant movement, every player would have to be polled for all of that data, have all of the data parsed and the debuff applied, discontinued or denied on a near constant basis because no one stands still. And bear in mind that the underlying code you want them to add to is far from perfect, most of it is rather shoddy.
At best it's just one more bottleneck, at worst it's a whole lot of bottlenecks combined with bugs that pop up God only knows where. Think about it, we still get stuck in combat, they can't get that right. How would you feel when you get stuck with a debuff simply because you just want to get in on some of the action?
Besides considering the additional bottlenecks, lag and bugs that it would cause, think about this. We go to Cyrodiil to fight, we don't go there avoid them so that we won't get stuck with a debuff. I'm sure everyone appreciates the exchange of ideas, but it's time to move on from this one and onto something constructive.NA-PC
Fantasia4 -
SkysOutThizeOut✭✭✭✭Yes, reduce campaign caps to force population to disperse to other campaigns while ZOS looks for a fix. Also, temporarily increase rewards (double/ triple maybe) for staying in shor for a month.@Delsskia then move on. No one is forcing you to read this.0 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭No, keep it the way it is and wait 5 more years for the fix that may never come.You can't pull a piece of the original suggestion out of context, make up some random numbers that make you feel better about it and then use your alternative facts to proclaim how great the idea is. Reality still wins out. .
Exactly.1 -
The Uninvited✭✭✭✭✭
✭Other, list suggestion below.The Uninvited wrote: »The Uninvited wrote: »The Uninvited wrote: »Again? Nah, it's the concentration of zergs in one spot combined with all the calculations of CP for all these players. Fix should be found in the CP calculations.
It has already been demonstrated CP does not affect lag. Zos did a test close to 2 years ago and removed all CP from all campaigns and lag still persisted.
I am surprised someone would still claim this is an issue after what seemed to be a decisive test.
A decisive test of which they NEVER published the results?
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/323521/cyrodiil-performance-test-and-double-ap-event/p1
Edit: You also left out the part where I said "it's the concentration of zergs in one spot combined with all the calculations"
They have no need to publish detailed data. We are not entitled to it. Clearly, they would not have gone to such an extreme if there were not willing to act on the data. This comment I quoted is just a desperate attempt and grasping at straws.
They have done worse and you know it. Don't give me that crap.
LOL. So they go through a lot of effort to test a theory that could fix lag in Cyrodiil and ignore the results. That makes sense.
Also, lag was present before CP so do not give me that crap that CP was somehow a fix, Zos tested it and lied to us about it's effects..
2016:N0TPLAYER2 wrote: »
Hey rich. When ya gonna fix your busted game?
ZOS_RichLambert wrote: » You know you don't have to be here right?
2018:
I know people who left the game over this or cancelled their subscription.
So yeah. go tell me again how much effort they put into fixing the lag. You even admit yourself that there was lag before CP, which was introduced in 2015.
So there was lag even in 2014 and it's still not fixed? Jup, lot of effort...Pandora's Promise (rip) | LND | Pactriotic | IKnowWhatUDidLastWinter's | The Uninvited |
Ride the paranoia | All life is pain | Only the grave is real2 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭No, keep it the way it is and wait 5 more years for the fix that may never come.The Uninvited wrote: »The Uninvited wrote: »The Uninvited wrote: »The Uninvited wrote: »Again? Nah, it's the concentration of zergs in one spot combined with all the calculations of CP for all these players. Fix should be found in the CP calculations.
It has already been demonstrated CP does not affect lag. Zos did a test close to 2 years ago and removed all CP from all campaigns and lag still persisted.
I am surprised someone would still claim this is an issue after what seemed to be a decisive test.
A decisive test of which they NEVER published the results?
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/323521/cyrodiil-performance-test-and-double-ap-event/p1
Edit: You also left out the part where I said "it's the concentration of zergs in one spot combined with all the calculations"
They have no need to publish detailed data. We are not entitled to it. Clearly, they would not have gone to such an extreme if there were not willing to act on the data. This comment I quoted is just a desperate attempt and grasping at straws.
They have done worse and you know it. Don't give me that crap.
LOL. So they go through a lot of effort to test a theory that could fix lag in Cyrodiil and ignore the results. That makes sense.
Also, lag was present before CP so do not give me that crap that CP was somehow a fix, Zos tested it and lied to us about it's effects..
2016:
And your point? I do not recall exactly when it happened but know it has been over 18 months. The year is not very relevant.
Edited by idk on December 21, 2018 9:56PM0 -
The Uninvited✭✭✭✭✭
✭Other, list suggestion below.The Uninvited wrote: »The Uninvited wrote: »The Uninvited wrote: »The Uninvited wrote: »Again? Nah, it's the concentration of zergs in one spot combined with all the calculations of CP for all these players. Fix should be found in the CP calculations.
It has already been demonstrated CP does not affect lag. Zos did a test close to 2 years ago and removed all CP from all campaigns and lag still persisted.
I am surprised someone would still claim this is an issue after what seemed to be a decisive test.
A decisive test of which they NEVER published the results?
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/323521/cyrodiil-performance-test-and-double-ap-event/p1
Edit: You also left out the part where I said "it's the concentration of zergs in one spot combined with all the calculations"
They have no need to publish detailed data. We are not entitled to it. Clearly, they would not have gone to such an extreme if there were not willing to act on the data. This comment I quoted is just a desperate attempt and grasping at straws.
They have done worse and you know it. Don't give me that crap.
LOL. So they go through a lot of effort to test a theory that could fix lag in Cyrodiil and ignore the results. That makes sense.
Also, lag was present before CP so do not give me that crap that CP was somehow a fix, Zos tested it and lied to us about it's effects..
2016:
And your point? I do not recall exactly when it happened but know it has been over 18 months. The year is not very relevant.
The point still being "They have done worse and you know it."Pandora's Promise (rip) | LND | Pactriotic | IKnowWhatUDidLastWinter's | The Uninvited |
Ride the paranoia | All life is pain | Only the grave is real0 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭No, keep it the way it is and wait 5 more years for the fix that may never come.The Uninvited wrote: »The Uninvited wrote: »The Uninvited wrote: »The Uninvited wrote: »The Uninvited wrote: »Again? Nah, it's the concentration of zergs in one spot combined with all the calculations of CP for all these players. Fix should be found in the CP calculations.
It has already been demonstrated CP does not affect lag. Zos did a test close to 2 years ago and removed all CP from all campaigns and lag still persisted.
I am surprised someone would still claim this is an issue after what seemed to be a decisive test.
A decisive test of which they NEVER published the results?
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/323521/cyrodiil-performance-test-and-double-ap-event/p1
Edit: You also left out the part where I said "it's the concentration of zergs in one spot combined with all the calculations"
They have no need to publish detailed data. We are not entitled to it. Clearly, they would not have gone to such an extreme if there were not willing to act on the data. This comment I quoted is just a desperate attempt and grasping at straws.
They have done worse and you know it. Don't give me that crap.
LOL. So they go through a lot of effort to test a theory that could fix lag in Cyrodiil and ignore the results. That makes sense.
Also, lag was present before CP so do not give me that crap that CP was somehow a fix, Zos tested it and lied to us about it's effects..
2016:
And your point? I do not recall exactly when it happened but know it has been over 18 months. The year is not very relevant.
The point still being "They have done worse and you know it."
The number 2016 is meaningless in and of itself. As for the testing of removing CP from Cyrodiil it was fairly clear heavy lag persisted so it is seemingly pointless to continue the empty banter you are dishing out. Seems more like something belonging on the silly conspiracy theory sites along with doubt the moon exists.
1 -
zyk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭No, keep it the way it is and wait 5 more years for the fix that may never come.
This says it all, really. I understand that Rich was responding to a customer who came off as irate, but obviously the onus is on the senior developer to be the bigger person by showing humility and empathy towards a paying customer who is frustrated because the product is defective.The Uninvited wrote: »ZOS_RichLambert wrote: » You know you don't have to be here right?
Gina called her joke distasteful, insensitive, and offensive, yet it is still there.The Uninvited wrote: »
I can forgive Rich and Gina for individual faux pas, but the really telling part is that they felt comfortable posting these things. Most companies would consider this customer mistreatment, which is a red line, and employees usually don't feel free to cross that line. That high profiile public facing ZOS employees feel free to do so when addressing AvA players is telling.Edited by zyk on December 22, 2018 4:38AM7 -
frozywozy✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Yes, reduce campaign caps to force population to disperse to other campaigns while ZOS looks for a fix. Also, temporarily increase rewards (double/ triple maybe) for staying in shor for a month.
This says it all, really. I understand that Rich was responding to a customer who came off as irate, but obviously the onus is on the senior developer to be the bigger person by showing humility and empathy towards a paying customer who is frustrated because the product is defective.The Uninvited wrote: »ZOS_RichLambert wrote: » You know you don't have to be here right?
Gina called her joke distasteful, insensitive, and offensive, yet it is still there.The Uninvited wrote: »
I can forgive Rich and Gina for individual faux pas, but the really telling part is that they felt comfortable posting these things. Most companies would consider this customer mistreatment, which is a red line, and employees usually don't feel free to cross that line. That high profiile public facing ZOS employees feel free to do so when addressing AvA players is telling.
Agreed with you for once. lolFrozn - Stamdk - AR50
Frosted - Magplar - AR50
Frodn - Magden - AR50
Warmed - Magblade - AR50
Mmfrozy - Magsorc - AR44
Necrozn - Magcro - AR32
Twitch.TV/FrozyTV
PvP Group Builds
“Small minds discuss people, average minds discuss events, and great minds discuss ideas.” -Eleanor Roosevelt- Fix Volendrung (spawn location - weapon white on the map causing the wielder to keep it forever - usable with emperorship)
- Remove / Change CPs System, remove current CP/noCP campaigns and introduce one 30days with lock, one with no locks
- Fix crashes when approaching a keep under attack because of bad / wrong rendering prioritization system
- Change emperorship to value faction score points and not alliance points - see this and this
- Fix long loading screens (mostly caused by players joining group out of rendering range)
- Add 2 more quickslots to the wheel or add a different wheel for sieges weaponry only
- Fix Balista Bolts not dealing damage on walls or doors if deployed at a certain place
- Release bigger battlegrounds with 8 to 16 players per team and only two teams
- Fix the permanent block animation - see examples : link1 link2 link3 link4 link5
- Gives players 10 minutes to get back into Cyrodiil after relogging / crashing
- Add a function to ignore the Claiming system of useless rewards
- Improve the Mailing System / Rewards of the Worthy stacking
- Assign specific group sizes to specific campaigns (24-16-8)
- Make forward camps impossible to place near objectives
- Make snares only available from ground effects abilities
- Change emperorship to last minimum 24hours
- Fix body sliding after cc breaking too quickly
- Remove Block Casting through Battle Spirit
- Fix the speed drop while jumping - see video
- Fix loading screens when keeps upgrade
- Fix Rams going crazy (spinning around)
- Bring back dynamic ulti regeneration
- Fix speed bug (abilities locked)
- Introduce dynamic population
- Lower population cap by 20%
- Add Snare Immunity potions
- Bring resurrection sickness
- Fix character desync
- Fix cc breaking bug
- Fix gap closer bug
- Fix health desync
- Fix combat bug
- Fix streak bug
- Fix server lag
0 -
SkysOutThizeOut✭✭✭✭Yes, reduce campaign caps to force population to disperse to other campaigns while ZOS looks for a fix. Also, temporarily increase rewards (double/ triple maybe) for staying in shor for a month.https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/450388/a-list-of-ideas-that-could-reduce-lag-in-cyrodiil-vote-your-preference#latest0
-
The Uninvited✭✭✭✭✭
✭Other, list suggestion below.The Uninvited wrote: »The Uninvited wrote: »The Uninvited wrote: »The Uninvited wrote: »The Uninvited wrote: »Again? Nah, it's the concentration of zergs in one spot combined with all the calculations of CP for all these players. Fix should be found in the CP calculations.
It has already been demonstrated CP does not affect lag. Zos did a test close to 2 years ago and removed all CP from all campaigns and lag still persisted.
I am surprised someone would still claim this is an issue after what seemed to be a decisive test.
A decisive test of which they NEVER published the results?
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/323521/cyrodiil-performance-test-and-double-ap-event/p1
Edit: You also left out the part where I said "it's the concentration of zergs in one spot combined with all the calculations"
They have no need to publish detailed data. We are not entitled to it. Clearly, they would not have gone to such an extreme if there were not willing to act on the data. This comment I quoted is just a desperate attempt and grasping at straws.
They have done worse and you know it. Don't give me that crap.
LOL. So they go through a lot of effort to test a theory that could fix lag in Cyrodiil and ignore the results. That makes sense.
Also, lag was present before CP so do not give me that crap that CP was somehow a fix, Zos tested it and lied to us about it's effects..
2016:
And your point? I do not recall exactly when it happened but know it has been over 18 months. The year is not very relevant.
The point still being "They have done worse and you know it."
The number 2016 is meaningless in and of itself. As for the testing of removing CP from Cyrodiil it was fairly clear heavy lag persisted so it is seemingly pointless to continue the empty banter you are dishing out. Seems more like something belonging on the silly conspiracy theory sites along with doubt the moon exists.
If you read the topic about the testing of removing CP, it's very clear to me in the comments that for some indeed the lag persisted (which could also be on their end), but for others the gameplay improved.
However, we don't know for sure because ZOS NEVER have let us known the outcome of the test.
So for all we know, you could be right or I could be right.
This has nothing to do with a conspiracy theory, except for the conspiracy theory that ZOS doesn't care about us. But you can also call that fact these days.Pandora's Promise (rip) | LND | Pactriotic | IKnowWhatUDidLastWinter's | The Uninvited |
Ride the paranoia | All life is pain | Only the grave is real1 -
O_LYKOS✭✭✭✭✭
✭Why increase the rewards for staying in shor for a month tho? i dont get it.PC NA - GreggsSausageRollXbox NA - Olykos66PS NA - Olykos2660 -
SkysOutThizeOut✭✭✭✭Yes, reduce campaign caps to force population to disperse to other campaigns while ZOS looks for a fix. Also, temporarily increase rewards (double/ triple maybe) for staying in shor for a month.@O_LYKOS because it would encourage more people to play for a month. And why a month? Because after a month there is a greater chance people will have stayed compared to a week. And I think you’d have to really incentivize players to change, at least initially.0
-
O_LYKOS✭✭✭✭✭
✭@SkysOutThizeOut Would that just not make it another monthly campaign? Or are you suggesting monthly rewards on top the weekly campaign rewards? I can't see them tracking weekly rewards and monthly rewards on one campaign tho tbh.PC NA - GreggsSausageRollXbox NA - Olykos66PS NA - Olykos2660 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭No, keep it the way it is and wait 5 more years for the fix that may never come.SkysOutThizeOut wrote: »@O_LYKOS because it would encourage more people to play for a month. And why a month? Because after a month there is a greater chance people will have stayed compared to a week. And I think you’d have to really incentivize players to change, at least initially.
First, not sure what this has to do with lowering the pop cap to force people into the lower population campaigns. But it is also an assumption that extending the length of a 7 day campaign will encourage more to pvp more. It really does not offer an incentive.
Granted, I have no issues with the other campaigns changing to a 30 day campaign. After all, that is not why Vivec is the most popular. Back when we could fill up more than one campaign we will gravitated to the full campaigns because that is where the PvP was. I take issue with the empty promise that reducing the pop caps will solve the lag issue even though it did not solve it the other times the pop cap were reduced.0 -
SkysOutThizeOut✭✭✭✭Yes, reduce campaign caps to force population to disperse to other campaigns while ZOS looks for a fix. Also, temporarily increase rewards (double/ triple maybe) for staying in shor for a month.@O_LYKOS I’m actually proposing an event for a month’s time as another idea to spread pop. If you stay in shor for a month you get extra rewards, in addition to ZOS permanently bumping up the weekly rewards to slightly outpace vivecs monthly. That one month event would just be an attempt to influence/encourage the population from vivec to spread to see if they can’t resuscitate Shor. But need people to want something in mass and need devs to care. I keep throwing ideas out there to see if any stick.
@idk we’ve moved on from specifically just discussing lowering pop cap to discussing other ideas in general. And I think o_lykos accessesed the link from another thread I shared.1 -
Dreyloch✭✭✭✭✭Other, list suggestion below.Reducing the population on the servers and hoping everyone will move to another does not seem to work. There just isn't enough PvP'ers anymore to properly have a healthy population across more than 1 server. So for instance. If they added another 30 day CP server, this would only make 2 servers dominated by 2 factions. The third in population would never win, or be forced to ALL congregate on one of the servers to stay competitive. If they made Shor a 30 day campaign it would relive some pressure on Vivec, but again, both servers will be dominated by one faction each. Perfect example is Sotha Sil NA. Totally dominated by one faction. Like 20k points- ahead -of -second -place- faction...type domination rofl. This also leads to Emp swapping which many also hate.
So no, imo there are a couple other solutions. Faction locks-You pick a server, you pick the faction you want to play on it and that's it. Your account bound to that server able to play only that faction. There has to be an added system to this though. If anyone has ever played Aion, then you know what I'm talking about. A server can become "cut-off" from playing a faction until the full population evens out. Then it opens up again.
Another way to do this is not having any faction ties. The server just tosses us in where needed to keep things as even as possible. This comes with the price of possibly being separated from your guild or group of friends that you play with.
Lastly, /sigh and I say this with just soo much disdain...FIX THE LAG IN THE FIRST PLACE!!! I can honestly play at prime time on vivec with ultra graphics on. My FPS dips to 20 in super huge battles (unacceptable for most, but actually still playable). The thing is the PING is what's killing us all. The netcode or whatever coding that goes into making cyrodiil possible just simply can't keep up. I understand this is super hard to totally eliminate for ZoS. Most of the community has just accepted it at this point, because there's no other game title out there as compelling to play. But someday there will be, and ZoS will have to "find a way"...or get tossed aside. Great PvE game, not so great PvP right now =/"The fear of Death, is often worse than death itself"2 -
Steelshiv✭✭✭✭Other, list suggestion below.Other: Leave it the way it is and find a fix that won't create more dead or half dead AP farming, empty, PvpvE servers.Edited by Steelshiv on January 3, 2019 9:16PM0 -
Derra✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Other, list suggestion below.Split cyrodiil into the 3 factions home territories and make it 3 seperate zones. Make the popcap of each of these lower 50 to 70% of current cyrodiil.
Create a useable travelshortcut through imperial city as additional connection between those maps.
Also adress issues like tankmeta + massive groupsize.<Noricum>
I live. I die. I live again.
Derra - DC - Sorc - AvA 50
Derrah - EP - Sorc - AvA 500 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭No, keep it the way it is and wait 5 more years for the fix that may never come.Split cyrodiil into the 3 factions home territories and make it 3 seperate zones. Make the popcap of each of these lower 50 to 70% of current cyrodiil.
Create a useable travelshortcut through imperial city as additional connection between those maps.
Also adress issues like tankmeta + massive groupsize.
Sounds more like a remove PvP from Cyrodiil post.
The size of Cyrodiil itself has nothing to do with lag as multiple servers are involved with one Cyrodiil. It is why lag can be experienced in one area but not another. Though I do agree the tank meta as it currently stands has been an issue. Group size is not really an issue and that is coming form someone who usually goes small group and sometimes solo.Edited by idk on January 3, 2019 9:44PM0 -
zyk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭No, keep it the way it is and wait 5 more years for the fix that may never come.For what it's worth:ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »Lowering population will not resolve client or server performance as you can still hit a critical amount of players in an area which would results in lower performance for either the client or the server. This is evident in cases where populations are equal, if not higher than regular campaigns, such as Black Water Blade on Xbox, and perform just fine.ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »@Neoakropolis is correct in that the less CP you have, the less passives you have, therefore the less the server needs to calculate per combat action. This can also be said about armor set procs, player passives and active abilities that have to hit multiple players or sort through multiple players before firing off their abilities to a specific or sub-set of targets.ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »More players means more server calculations; that is 100% correct. However the key variable in all these scenarios is how much information is being calculated on a character by character basis depending on abilities being used, passives, armor sets, etc. This is why population is not as big a factor compared to what's being calculated on a character by character basis within that population. Let's take an example of a typical armor setup now a days.
A player wearing Viper, Velidreth, and Red Mountain doing a single heavy attack costs the server 3 times as much as a player doing Heavy attack without those sets because of calculating whether to proc those 3 sets or not. Even when a proc is on cooldown, the server needs to check per attack if the cooldown is done yet, which means every attack it checks whether it can fire or not based on either percentage, cooldown, or other situations. Factor in Champion Point passives, class passives, weapon passives and whatever temporary passive bonuses from potions, and you add to those calculations per attack/being attacked. In campaigns like Blackwater Blade and Azura, there are simply less things to calculate even when they have higher population than Trueflame.
1