Can we get some more insight into what all the Cyrodiil tests revealed?

oXI_Viper_IXo

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Now that we’ve had time to digest a lot of data and information, we have a better idea of next steps and the work needed to produce noticeable improvements to performance in Cyrodiil. This work is complex and will take a fair amount of time and effort. We are committed to improving the PvP experience, though, and we have already begun scheduling out this work. Please note that none of the scheduled work will implement any of the changes we made on PC during past tests, and at this time we don’t plan to run any additional tests. .

Instead of being so vague, can you give us some more specific details on what steps need to be taken and what work needs to be done to produce noticeable improvements in performance? What kind of changes to Cyrodiil can we expect in the future?

@ZOS_GinaBruno
@ZOS_BrianWheeler

Starlight_Whisper

I miss the deer

Gythral

"looks for headlights"

MKintr

They said, it yielded “interesting” data.

They admitted that the reduction of healing to group only was useless. Now they say "none of the ... work will implement any of the changes we made on PC during (all) past tests". That's another confession, that those tests were useless.

Those whole tests were just to appease the players and to distract them from the fact that this bugged game, would require too much effort to repair. An amount of effort and costs which the devs are not willing or allowed to undertake. Selling horse skins is more profitable. So don't expect any details, because there are none. For the foreseeable future I don't expect any change to the better.

merevie

They have 'a better idea'.
It's a massive problem that takes time.
That's the biggest admission we will get from people who are employed to keep the customers happy.
Not sugarcoatable.
Unfortunately, they already detonated the two biggest minefields possible:

'play it your way'

and

'have a purpose to log in and buy content'.

At this point, they may as well just tell us how bad it is. Better to have people mad at one moment?

PS Learnt today that we can put our honey hives on posts :P Thanks LF!

zaria

MKintr wrote: »

They said, it yielded “interesting” data.

They admitted that the reduction of healing to group only was useless. Now they say "none of the ... work will implement any of the changes we made on PC during (all) past tests". That's another confession, that those tests were useless.

Those whole tests were just to appease the players and to distract them from the fact that this bugged game, would require too much effort to repair. An amount of effort and costs which the devs are not willing or allowed to undertake. Selling horse skins is more profitable. So don't expect any details, because there are none. For the foreseeable future I don't expect any change to the better.

It should be possible to look on the logs for times the servers had issues and what then caused most issues, however I suspect this is simply huge fights between lots of players and its highly probable that all the AoE and proc is an huge part of it.
However I hardly had issues PC-EU Blackreach last year, its much more smooth than 2 years ago then loading screens was pretty common.
Now if stronger servers had helped they gone for that, but they might be pretty beefy or might not work do to how the mega server architecture or they lease is set up.
Now its been some weird stuff like friends lists creating lags, stuff who would not show up in the log over combat transactions. It might be DB related.

We also have the client, original PS4 and One has far more issues than PS5 but not entirely hardware people on bis pc has issues. Now this is not something they can come out and say like the PS4 is obsolete or that all the outfits and mounts we added require lots of memory to load.

Sangwyne

They revealed that ZOS should probably not be making sweeping changes based off [snip] forum feedback.

[Edited to remove Baiting]

Raammzzaa

MKintr wrote: »

Those whole tests were just to appease the players and to distract them from the fact that this bugged game, would require too much effort to repair. An amount of effort and costs which the devs are not willing or allowed to undertake.

Yet, every time midyear mayhem rolls around additional resources are added, and the game works pretty well until the event ends. I suspect that your second sentence got pretty close to the mark - i.e. they are looking for a more economical fix with the tests. The one that we have already seen works (adding additional server resources) is simply too expensive a solution.

MKintr

Midyear Mayhem is the same mess during prime time on overcrowded campaigns. But most time players are spread among more campaigns and ballers can't assemble their zergs, so it appears to be better. It is not a server problem, its a programming problem.

oXI_Viper_IXo

I'm just tired of going through this same old song and dance year after year where they make big promises about nailing down performance or making big improvements or refining performance.

If anything, performance has somehow gotten consistently worse over the years even with the population cap being lowered multiple times.

It's time we start hearing some specifics rather than more vague and generic promises.