kyle.wilson wrote: »Server issues have returned for the pvp server on PCNA.
Pop was cut in half when the new server were installed, what's the excuse now?
I would expect a company owned by Microsoft to have better access to high quality servers and engineers that run them. That is unless the delay was digging the "new" servers out a landfill.
DirtyDeeds765 wrote: »kyle.wilson wrote: »Server issues have returned for the pvp server on PCNA.
Pop was cut in half when the new server were installed, what's the excuse now?
I would expect a company owned by Microsoft to have better access to high quality servers and engineers that run them. That is unless the delay was digging the "new" servers out a landfill.
Well fortunately, Kyle, the hardware refresh isn't the end of the fixes for performance. The server rewrite begins with the Necrom chapter.
@DirtyDeeds765
DirtyDeeds765 wrote: »kyle.wilson wrote: »Server issues have returned for the pvp server on PCNA.
Pop was cut in half when the new server were installed, what's the excuse now?
I would expect a company owned by Microsoft to have better access to high quality servers and engineers that run them. That is unless the delay was digging the "new" servers out a landfill.
Well fortunately, Kyle, the hardware refresh isn't the end of the fixes for performance. The server rewrite begins with the Necrom chapter.
@DirtyDeeds765
I wish ZOS would verifiera that, so far not a word, so I must assume it’s delayed.
DirtyDeeds765 wrote: »DirtyDeeds765 wrote: »kyle.wilson wrote: »Server issues have returned for the pvp server on PCNA.
Pop was cut in half when the new server were installed, what's the excuse now?
I would expect a company owned by Microsoft to have better access to high quality servers and engineers that run them. That is unless the delay was digging the "new" servers out a landfill.
Well fortunately, Kyle, the hardware refresh isn't the end of the fixes for performance. The server rewrite begins with the Necrom chapter.
DirtyDeeds765
I wish ZOS would verifiera that, so far not a word, so I must assume it’s delayed.
If we haven't heard anything to the contrary, we should assume it's still coming. Not vice versa.
DirtyDeeds765
This is from the studio directors letter in Dec. 2022.
"Our multi-threading work continues, as we announced a month or so back. Just to remind everyone, this is the initiative that will result in better overall server performance. As we already announced, we will be phasing these changes in over the course of 2023, starting with the Chapter in Q2. We’ll keep everyone updated in patch notes going forward."
link https://www.elderscrollsonline.com/en-us/news/post/63363
There is nothing in the PTS patch notes about the multi-thread code, thus it's by their own words delayed.
@ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_Kevin The Bethesda Support says on Twitter, the new Servers for Xbox NA are up now, is this right? Why we don’t get any Information here?
@ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_Kevin The Bethesda Support says on Twitter, the new Servers for Xbox NA are up now, is this right? Why we don’t get any Information here?
Thought the same thing. Would expect zos to be celebrating it since its been a big deal for such a long time, but theres nothing from zos at all?
@ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_Kevin The Bethesda Support says on Twitter, the new Servers for Xbox NA are up now, is this right? Why we don’t get any Information here?
Thought the same thing. Would expect zos to be celebrating it since its been a big deal for such a long time, but theres nothing from zos at all?
Seems to me that no one from ZOS or Bethesda ever said that the maintenance today was going to be the hardware update.
This is what Bethesda says. Idk
So since the XB NA Servers got done this week & the Mayhem is announced as May 11th, Can we guess or get Confirmation that the PS NA Servers will get done Monday/Tuesday may 8/9 coming up ?! Since all should be done BEFORE the pvp event !
Goodman777 wrote: »I don't know about you, but there are lags in battle, often skills are not activated during active pvp.
can anyone say whether there will be improvements in this direction, or with lags and we will give up forever?
.DirtyDeeds765 wrote: »DirtyDeeds765 wrote: »kyle.wilson wrote: »Server issues have returned for the pvp server on PCNA.
Pop was cut in half when the new server were installed, what's the excuse now?
I would expect a company owned by Microsoft to have better access to high quality servers and engineers that run them. That is unless the delay was digging the "new" servers out a landfill.
Well fortunately, Kyle, the hardware refresh isn't the end of the fixes for performance. The server rewrite begins with the Necrom chapter.
DirtyDeeds765
I wish ZOS would verifiera that, so far not a word, so I must assume it’s delayed.
If we haven't heard anything to the contrary, we should assume it's still coming. Not vice versa.
DirtyDeeds765
When it comes to schedules for backend work, I am not sure I completely agree. That stuff seems to slide around more than a skeever on ice. Still, as this is server side, it does not have to be part of PTS at the onset. Or, given recent Lobby issues, maybe it already is. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
.DirtyDeeds765 wrote: »DirtyDeeds765 wrote: »kyle.wilson wrote: »Server issues have returned for the pvp server on PCNA.
Pop was cut in half when the new server were installed, what's the excuse now?
I would expect a company owned by Microsoft to have better access to high quality servers and engineers that run them. That is unless the delay was digging the "new" servers out a landfill.
Well fortunately, Kyle, the hardware refresh isn't the end of the fixes for performance. The server rewrite begins with the Necrom chapter.
DirtyDeeds765
I wish ZOS would verifiera that, so far not a word, so I must assume it’s delayed.
If we haven't heard anything to the contrary, we should assume it's still coming. Not vice versa.
DirtyDeeds765
When it comes to schedules for backend work, I am not sure I completely agree. That stuff seems to slide around more than a skeever on ice. Still, as this is server side, it does not have to be part of PTS at the onset. Or, given recent Lobby issues, maybe it already is. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
The server-side code is the core of the game. This is the foundation and where the game actually plays out. This is where it is determined if we damaged or healed something.
Why would we not want to test significant changes to the game's core?
.DirtyDeeds765 wrote: »DirtyDeeds765 wrote: »kyle.wilson wrote: »Server issues have returned for the pvp server on PCNA.
Pop was cut in half when the new server were installed, what's the excuse now?
I would expect a company owned by Microsoft to have better access to high quality servers and engineers that run them. That is unless the delay was digging the "new" servers out a landfill.
Well fortunately, Kyle, the hardware refresh isn't the end of the fixes for performance. The server rewrite begins with the Necrom chapter.
DirtyDeeds765
I wish ZOS would verifiera that, so far not a word, so I must assume it’s delayed.
If we haven't heard anything to the contrary, we should assume it's still coming. Not vice versa.
DirtyDeeds765
When it comes to schedules for backend work, I am not sure I completely agree. That stuff seems to slide around more than a skeever on ice. Still, as this is server side, it does not have to be part of PTS at the onset. Or, given recent Lobby issues, maybe it already is. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
The server-side code is the core of the game. This is the foundation and where the game actually plays out. This is where it is determined if we damaged or healed something.
Why would we not want to test significant changes to the game's core?
It isn't up to us, though. They have dropped things outside of normal PTS schedules. For backend things, they can do it at any time, since users don't have to install anything.