CameraBeardThePirate wrote: »MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »It does work and a lot of people enjoy it in the way it is. Speak for yourself.
Look at those graphs. If good performance is 50% or below on the Y, and you are routinely hitting 100% at a player cap of 360 - objectively it does not work.MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »I disagree. How about remove the animations of glowing swords and weapons , every single armor bit needs to be calculated in their animations, same as every single mount wich appears with a flashbang ultra LED animation and 16 different moving arms.
Those things eat your memory. The issue is the server calcs which are from the skills.MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »Take this from me and im gone and will not come back.
Nobody is taking anything. Did you even read the ZOS post?
"As a dev team, Scenario 1 (We would open a Vengeance Cyrodiil campaign sometime next year with a special ruleset based on the previous and upcoming tests, and leave Grey Host open as it is now) is the one we strongly prefer and is the most likely. We want you to have a choice between playing in Vengeance or Gray Host, and would closely monitor both campaign populations to help inform any additional actions we should take moving forward."
''Those things eat your memory. The issue is the server calcs which are from the skills.''
Who says that ?
Everything has to be calculated. Every single step, every single move anything does, any interaction has to be calculated.
Um, no. Animations are client side. They might dip your framerate, but the problem with Cyrodiil is server lag, not framerate, which has nothing to do with client side animations and effects. It's entirely on skills and what they do, not what they look like. The server gets choked out from the hundreds of instances of HoTs and DoTs and AoE checks ticking constantly.
For what it's worth, I agree that Vengeance is trash tier PvP, but acting like flashy animations and effects have any influence on Cyrodiil's bad performance is misinformed at best and disingenuous at worst.