I completely agree with your sentiments, but sadly the PTS server is not of the same power as the live one.
This was demonstrated by a 'PVP' test set up via ZoS devs for 1.6 on the PTS. It was a terrible, butt awful experience for all.
IxSTALKERxI wrote: »They currently have one campaign available on PTS which is Haderus. I presume when the update hits PTS they'll stick with one campaign since PTS doesn't tend to get very crowded.
As ghostbane said, the PTS runs on a different server which doesn't seem to be very powerful. Two bars of population fighting in one area is enough to crash it and cause a rollback.
IxSTALKERxI wrote: »They currently have one campaign available on PTS which is Haderus. I presume when the update hits PTS they'll stick with one campaign since PTS doesn't tend to get very crowded.
As ghostbane said, the PTS runs on a different server which doesn't seem to be very powerful. Two bars of population fighting in one area is enough to crash it and cause a rollback.
It's any wonder we have the lag issues on the live servers. They don't have an adequate test server to begin with.
Seriously, how can you test for PVP lag resolution issues when the server can't handle the population that the live game has.....
AhPook_Is_Here wrote: »IxSTALKERxI wrote: »They currently have one campaign available on PTS which is Haderus. I presume when the update hits PTS they'll stick with one campaign since PTS doesn't tend to get very crowded.
As ghostbane said, the PTS runs on a different server which doesn't seem to be very powerful. Two bars of population fighting in one area is enough to crash it and cause a rollback.
It's any wonder we have the lag issues on the live servers. They don't have an adequate test server to begin with.
Seriously, how can you test for PVP lag resolution issues when the server can't handle the population that the live game has.....
You can use the magic of math (simple algebra) bottleneck hardware live/bottleneck hardware test * players at bottleneck point. this will give you the live threshold for a bottleneck for far fewer dollars.
kevlarto_ESO wrote: »PTS under powered or not it is still a good idea, they can get lots of data to mine and in the end hopefully help out the live campaigns, I think there should be a meteor shower or two on the PTS along with other things, maybe a proximity party
AhPook_Is_Here wrote: »IxSTALKERxI wrote: »They currently have one campaign available on PTS which is Haderus. I presume when the update hits PTS they'll stick with one campaign since PTS doesn't tend to get very crowded.
As ghostbane said, the PTS runs on a different server which doesn't seem to be very powerful. Two bars of population fighting in one area is enough to crash it and cause a rollback.
It's any wonder we have the lag issues on the live servers. They don't have an adequate test server to begin with.
Seriously, how can you test for PVP lag resolution issues when the server can't handle the population that the live game has.....
You can use the magic of math (simple algebra) bottleneck hardware live/bottleneck hardware test * players at bottleneck point. this will give you the live threshold for a bottleneck for far fewer dollars.
And that's worked soooooo well for them determining PVP lag.......NOT! lol
AhPook_Is_Here wrote: »AhPook_Is_Here wrote: »IxSTALKERxI wrote: »They currently have one campaign available on PTS which is Haderus. I presume when the update hits PTS they'll stick with one campaign since PTS doesn't tend to get very crowded.
As ghostbane said, the PTS runs on a different server which doesn't seem to be very powerful. Two bars of population fighting in one area is enough to crash it and cause a rollback.
It's any wonder we have the lag issues on the live servers. They don't have an adequate test server to begin with.
Seriously, how can you test for PVP lag resolution issues when the server can't handle the population that the live game has.....
You can use the magic of math (simple algebra) bottleneck hardware live/bottleneck hardware test * players at bottleneck point. this will give you the live threshold for a bottleneck for far fewer dollars.
And that's worked soooooo well for them determining PVP lag.......NOT! lol
How do you know they have done that? What if they have and just decided that scaling the server wasn't worth the dollar investment? Math is real, and it works, trust me!
AhPook_Is_Here wrote: »AhPook_Is_Here wrote: »IxSTALKERxI wrote: »They currently have one campaign available on PTS which is Haderus. I presume when the update hits PTS they'll stick with one campaign since PTS doesn't tend to get very crowded.
As ghostbane said, the PTS runs on a different server which doesn't seem to be very powerful. Two bars of population fighting in one area is enough to crash it and cause a rollback.
It's any wonder we have the lag issues on the live servers. They don't have an adequate test server to begin with.
Seriously, how can you test for PVP lag resolution issues when the server can't handle the population that the live game has.....
You can use the magic of math (simple algebra) bottleneck hardware live/bottleneck hardware test * players at bottleneck point. this will give you the live threshold for a bottleneck for far fewer dollars.
And that's worked soooooo well for them determining PVP lag.......NOT! lol
How do you know they have done that? What if they have and just decided that scaling the server wasn't worth the dollar investment? Math is real, and it works, trust me!
Something obviously isn't working otherwise everyone would have a smooth running PVP experience daily. Hopefully they can fix it.
AhPook_Is_Here wrote: »AhPook_Is_Here wrote: »AhPook_Is_Here wrote: »IxSTALKERxI wrote: »They currently have one campaign available on PTS which is Haderus. I presume when the update hits PTS they'll stick with one campaign since PTS doesn't tend to get very crowded.
As ghostbane said, the PTS runs on a different server which doesn't seem to be very powerful. Two bars of population fighting in one area is enough to crash it and cause a rollback.
It's any wonder we have the lag issues on the live servers. They don't have an adequate test server to begin with.
Seriously, how can you test for PVP lag resolution issues when the server can't handle the population that the live game has.....
You can use the magic of math (simple algebra) bottleneck hardware live/bottleneck hardware test * players at bottleneck point. this will give you the live threshold for a bottleneck for far fewer dollars.
And that's worked soooooo well for them determining PVP lag.......NOT! lol
How do you know they have done that? What if they have and just decided that scaling the server wasn't worth the dollar investment? Math is real, and it works, trust me!
Something obviously isn't working otherwise everyone would have a smooth running PVP experience daily. Hopefully they can fix it.
I'd guess the reality is a pencil pusher said the capital outlay for more hardware was out of the question so they are left trying to optimize their software. I don't know how their original co-location deal was structured but the servers could at one point handle a lot more load, closer to your posts numbers around 1k total players, now it stalls on 300. Hard to believe their software is responsible for that big of a degradation in performance. I bet they let some of their hardware go a while back.