12 person group limit? Whaaaaaat?

Jaraal

Elsonso wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

On the face of it, ZOS is making a pretty serious reduction in their data backend.

The caveat with that is, as I said, that this backend change didn't make a big difference in Cyrodiil, and it really doesn't touch the performance problems that happen when lots and lots of players show up in the same placed without being grouped up.

That's what I don't understand. Since they stated that the reduction in group size in laggy Cyrodiil had no significant impact on performance, then how is it magically going to improve perfomance in a relatively smooth running PvE situation?

Simply because the two environments/scenarios are not the same. There is more to the group size than what is apparent from our perspective, and what happened with PVP simply isn't the same as with PVE.

So you're saying that 24 people standing around role playing is going to be a more problematic scenario than 24 people all trying to kill another group of 24 at the same time, while also fighting NPC guards and trying to dodge a bunch of siege fire spam?



Ok then....

Elsonso

Jaraal wrote: »

Elsonso wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

On the face of it, ZOS is making a pretty serious reduction in their data backend.

The caveat with that is, as I said, that this backend change didn't make a big difference in Cyrodiil, and it really doesn't touch the performance problems that happen when lots and lots of players show up in the same placed without being grouped up.

That's what I don't understand. Since they stated that the reduction in group size in laggy Cyrodiil had no significant impact on performance, then how is it magically going to improve perfomance in a relatively smooth running PvE situation?

Simply because the two environments/scenarios are not the same. There is more to the group size than what is apparent from our perspective, and what happened with PVP simply isn't the same as with PVE.

So you're saying that 24 people standing around role playing is going to be a more problematic scenario than 24 people all trying to kill another group of 24 at the same time, while also fighting NPC guards and trying to dodge a bunch of siege fire spam?



Ok then....

Actually, what I believe I am saying is that PVE and PVP are not the same and, from our perspective, the reasons are not as simple as people claiming that PVP didn't work so PVE won't work either.

Olauron

VaranisArano wrote: »

For the purposes of theoretical math, let's say that the client - server - client pipeline only has to handle two extra pieces of info per second when grouped up: health bar and chevron position on the map.

24 players sending that info to 24 players in their group: 1,152 server messages per second

12 players sending that same info to 12 players in their group: 288 server messages per second

On the face of it, ZOS is making a pretty serious reduction in their data backend.

Whether it is serious reduction or not can be better seen with relative numbers. While for each additional piece of data there may be the need for 552 new messages in case of 24 players and 132 in case of 12 players (or 576 and 144 in case of transmitting data back to the same player fo security (anticheat) or other reasons), it matters only when the amount of extra group messages is big enough comparable to the amount of already transmitted non-group messages (like positioning and health that are known to everyone around, group or not).

There are some other considerations to keep in mind.
First, packaging reduces the amount of messages. For example, I really hope that character outfit is not sent in separate messages for each piece of armor and weapon with style and all colors in different messages each (resulting in (7+4)*(1+3) messages), but in one bigger message.

Second, there should be no overlapping of data. Positioning, health and other such data should not be transmitted to group members, if it is already transmitted to them due to being close in a zone.

Third, only useful data should be transmitted. If some data is useless and will always be useless (like in case of consoles, where there are no add-ons), it should not be transmitted in the first place. Anything that is just potentially useful (like stuff reserved for add-ons) should be transmitted by request only and with low priority (server should not even try to send loot data, when positioning data is already in trouble). The same for companions: there is no need to send additional data about companions to group members, because it is already sent to everyone around. Companion data for group members in other zones doesn't really matter, just like their skills used.

JoeCapricorn

All I know is that in five days if they push this change through it's going to make a lot of people upset and hurt the ESO community.

I cannot believe ZOS would be so willing to charge ahead with this bonehead change.

StamPlar_1976

JoeCapricorn wrote: »

All I know is that in five days if they push this change through it's going to make a lot of people upset and hurt the ESO community.

I cannot believe ZOS would be so willing to charge ahead with this bonehead change.

Yeah....... Believe it. They most definitely would.

Savina

Curious how the 12-man groups are working out for the other posters in this thread? How difficult has it made events for the role-playing community? How are the smaller social guilds getting along with the group size limit?

From my perspective I can confirm it being just as I expected. It is a logistics headache for many of our events for the reasons I have stated previously in this thread. Our guild is incredibly lucky to have dedicated leadership, event hosts, and members that jump through all the hoops to pull off large events. Vanquish is making it work, not because we want this backwards step in social gatherings, because ZoS has deemed it as a necessary change.

How are the 12-man groups working out for you?