Maintenance for the week of June 1:
• [COMPLETE] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – June 2, 8:00AM EDT (12:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – June 3, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 8:00AM EDT (12:00 UTC)

Cyrodiil lag solution proposal.... Maybe

Lovndaddy
Lovndaddy
Now I’m no expert at coding by any means but how hard would it be for Zos to lower the population of Cyrodiil even if it’s just a little at a time till the game runs better until they find a fix I mean even if they have to open up new campaigns so be it
  • technohic
    technohic
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭
    This was earlier today. 3 bars for AD and EP, 2 DC. I posted it to show it's not network or video lag, look at my ping and frames; but it applies here. The ability you can see blink from press never went off. Maybe it's still too much for the server to handle. Should we take it down to 2 bar pop limit? I have a feeling that will not help as I hear battle grounds and PVE raids also have the issues at 12-24 players.




    I think the bottom line is it's either code or; server for the entire game, not just our instances; are overloaded and they need to invest resources
    Technohic - DC Templar
    Technohicz - DC Nightblade
    Technohix - DC Sorc
    TechDKnohic - DC DK
    Tech No Hic - DC Warden
    Necrohic - DC Necromancer
  • xshatox
    xshatox
    ✭✭✭
    I don’t think its just capacity problem, if ESO only has capacity problem lowering population might helped but if its code it will be difficult. From what i read they are still investigating on that end and might take a while (up to 2021 looking at their timeline) since they are mostly focus on content at the moment.
  • MincVinyl
    MincVinyl
    ✭✭✭✭
    Lowering the capacity of the server is just a blanket fix....much like how the blanket reduction in healing "fixes" the tank meta. There is no simple solution to something that has multiple variables causing the problem.
    1. Server hardware
    2. Anti-cheat system
    3. How dots/hots and aoe calculations work
    4. Over complicated sets/abilities/etc
    5. Cyrodil group meta (more players = more win)

    Lets say we have a current 30 player group hitting another 30 player group with aoes.....thats 900 calculations happening. Add in each player having to check 10 procs each....thats 9000. Now lets say that aoe has a dot attached and they all stack over 10sec.....9000+30players*30ticks*10sec*10procs = 99k calculations.

    Lets now say group zerging has been spread out by some change and those 30v30 can roughly hit 8 people with that aoe.....so that is 240 calculations. Now lets say procs are cut down in the game to each player having 3 procs...... 720 calculations. Now lets say that dots/hots do not stack(like how it used to be) and now there can only ever be 1 tick per player per second.....720+30players*1tick*10sec*3procs= 1620 calculations
    If only one of these gets solved we likely wont see a massive difference, but a chunk of lag removed. All of these issues cause the other issues to become exponentially worse. Inevitably these calculations will also get passed through the anti-cheat and the server has to deal with them. Zos has tried to fix the aoe issue before by doing an aoe cap. Which i suppose artificially blanket fixed one part of one of the issues(at the price of player enjoyment), but not the root of the issue. The root in the aoe case being how spread out players were.
    Still clappin cheeks on a Bosmer Stamsorc in 2020
  • Sheuib
    Sheuib
    ✭✭✭✭
    I would like it if they made one campaign that had a lower population limit. Some of us like playing on low population campaigns.

    We have gone through the cycles of 7 day vs 30 day and CP vs no CP. How about an iteration of low pop lock vs high pop lock. That way we all get to play on the type of campaign we like and it might be a good performance test as well.
  • gepe87
    gepe87
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Lower pop cap and open more campaigns (cp and nocp) with both campaign lock and unlocked .

    At this point is better to have depopulated servers than non functional.
    Gepe, MagSorc | Gepe Indoril, MagSorc
    Solo PvPer | Warlord | The Flawless Conqueror (yeah with a Magsorc, I'm a loser for that) and other PVE titles

    If you see edits on my replies: typos. English isn't my main language
  • idk
    idk
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    As already noted, Zos has reduced the pop cap multiple times. While reducing the pop cap, in theory, reduces the server load but the real impact is large numbers of players at the same keep, not how many are actually in Cryodiil.

    In reality, Cyrodiill worked better before they reduced the pop cap than it does today. Zos has added more aspects to the game that have added to the server load as well as moving checks from the client to the server.

    In other words, it is not a good solution.
    Really, idk
  • Alchimiste1
    Alchimiste1
    ✭✭✭
    Vinyl is completely right about the calculations and lag.
  • usmcjdking
    usmcjdking
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭
    The only solution is as @MincVinyl pointed out.

    0331
    0602
  • MincVinyl
    MincVinyl
    ✭✭✭✭
    gepe87 wrote: »
    Lower pop cap and open more campaigns (cp and nocp) with both campaign lock and unlocked .

    At this point is better to have depopulated servers than non functional.

    You are proposing another blanket concept much like how zos fixed the "tank" meta that does not fix the blatant problem at hand.
    idk wrote: »
    In reality, Cyrodiill worked better before they reduced the pop cap than it does today. Zos has added more aspects to the game that have added to the server load as well as moving checks from the client to the server.

    From what I have been able to test a lot of the code behind the scenes is being introduced this patch, which we will have to see. They messed around with how damage calculations are done during the last pts (seen from a bug in cast time abilities missing a factor of 2 in part of the calculation).

    What concerned me was that they changed around how some proc sets work, removing the chance possibility. This might indicate that zos is looking to move things back client side, people could cheat those chance values but not change a time based cooldown value without eventually being caught.
    Still clappin cheeks on a Bosmer Stamsorc in 2020
Sign In or Register to comment.