Maintenance for the week of December 29:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – December 29
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – December 29
My thoughs on AoE caps. What would you sacrifice ?
Rune_Relic
✭✭✭✭✭
✭
✭
Patch 1.1 AoE Caps
http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/89420/area-of-effect-abilities-maximum-target-cap-clarification/p1
All skills...
upto 6 targets @ 100%.
Except Alliance War...
Siege Weapons - Uncapped targets @ 100%.
Caltrops - 12 targets @ 100%.
Rapid Manoevers - Uncapped targets @ 100%.
War Horn - 24 targets @ 100%.
Barrier - 20 targets @ 100%.
Purge - Uncapped targets @ 100%.
Siege Shield - 20 targets @ 100%.
Patch 1.6 AoE Caps
http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/1506153#Comment_1506153
All skills...
1-6 targets @ 100%.
7-24 targets @ 50%.
30-60 targets @ 25%.
Average 1-60 @ 42.5%
Secondary effects hit...
upto 6 targets @ 100%
Forum requested changes for AoE caps to fix lag.
All skills..
upto 60 targets @ 100%.
Historical reality with the AoE caps.
Aside from a limited number of skills, all AoE was originally capped at 6 targets (except alliance war) even through beta (see link above).
Buffs are smart, but debuffs hit nearest to center of effect first.
After 1.1, performance began to degrade, but not to a large degree, until patch 1.3, where major lighting modifications and anti-cheat code was adopted on the server.
The exact details of the anti-cheat code are unknown, although it is common practice to move calculations from client to server to eliminate client hackers from making up their own values (like gold, items, xp, damage and location).
The Lighting patch was purported to have been thoroughly tested to check its impact on performance and found not to be the issue by ZOS.
This only leaves combat calcs being moved from the client to the server as part of the anti-cheat code introduced.
At this time the population of ESO was also growing with an inlfux of players from other MMOs.
Along with which came a growing trend to use balling and zerging tactics, which hadnt really been a major issue to begin with.
Like a virus introduced to a new environment, the problem snowballed to epidemic proportions.
Some saw it as protection from bigger groups.
Some saw it as an easy way to gain AP and the best gear quicker.
The result was an even greater increase in Lag and the reduction of server performance.
An arms race had begun on who could have the largest group with the highest burst damage.
By the time patch 1.5 hit, lag-trains were freely roaming cyrodiil and destroying eveything in their path.
The use of OP bugged AoE was rampant and completely capitalised on by these groups.
Many believed the damage mitigation afforded by group size simply made them invincible and invulnerable.
So the removal of AoE caps was demanded so that solo players could hit more than 6 @ 100% out of the upto 24 players groups who could hit upto 144 players @ 100% damage or 6 players @ 2400% damage (while sharing a smart healing/purging circle).
The argument was that the 24 man group could be wiped out quicker, so that the burst of damage calculations could be ended quicker.
I objected vehemently at the time and pointed out that people would just heal through more damage and the server would lag even more under all the extra calculations.
With Patch 1.6 came the effective removal of AoE caps but with limitations.
Upto 60 people could now be hit with each AoE, although only the first 6 took 100% damage.
The result was an instant and catastrophic disaster.
With a 10 fold increase on the damage calcs for the same number of players on screen, the server simply crumbled under the load.
The game became a freeze- frame slide show or powerpoint presentation.
ZOS solution to the problem (rather than revert the 60 people cap back to 6) was to respeatedly and massively cut the max population in any campaign.
Eventually when it was realised that even these drastic measures were not enough, they begged people to spread out and intoduced incentives to help encourage this.
People are now demanding that the AoE cap does 100% damage to all 60 people or even be unlimited so that everyone within the damage radius gets 100% damage (even if this was 500 people).
Why raising AoE caps does not fix lag.
Let start with some simple examples of the problem with AoE caps and server load.
Patch 1.1...
In the hay day of cyrodiil we could have 100 per faction on screen with one tick or hit every two seconds.
With single target skills this amounts to 3 factions x 100 players x 1 target = upto 300 target calculations per tick (part client-side).
Now we are going to go extreme and say everyone is going to use AoE in a keep with high density (although single target combat was much more frequent in early cyrodiil)
With a 6 target limit this amounts to 3 factions x 100 players x 6 target = upto 1800 target calculations per tick (part client-side).
Patch 1.3...
After Patch 1.3 at least some of the client side calculations were off loaded to the server only, creating delays in the calculations waiting for server response + network/tavel time.
With single target skills this amounts to 3 factions x 100 players x 1 target = upto 300 target calculations per tick (server-side).
Now we are going to go extreme and say everyone is going to use AoE in a keep with high density (by this time single target skills are becoming less and less popular with more group on group combat)
With a 6 target limit this amounts to 3 factions x 100 players x 6 target = upto 1,800 target calculations per tick (server-side).
Patch 1.6...
After patch 1.6 hits ball/zerg groups have become rampant. Many people now cluster merely to have some chance of survival as a result.
With single target skills this amounts to 3 factions x 100 players x 1 target = 300 target calculations per tick (server-side).
Now we are going to go extreme and say everyone is going to use AoE in a keep with high density (by this time single target skills are almost usless with little to no.. one on one combat)
With a 60 target limit this amounts to 3 factions x 100 players x 60 target = 18,000 target calculations per tick (server-side).
Anyone with a basic grasp of maths should see the problem here.
We have moved further and further away from one on ones.. 300 target calculations per tick (at early cyrodiil with no lag) to 18,000 target calculations per tick with nothing but group on group using AoE.
We have increased damage calcs alone by upto 60x that of the earliest campaigns.
Is it really a surpise Cyrdoiil is unplayable ?
To get group on group combat back down to 300 target calculations per tick requires....
3 factions x 1.67 players x 60 targets
Being generous and saying everyones using AoE now, so 1800 would be fair...
3 factions x 10 players x 60 targets
Yes thats right.
If you want a 60 target cap and the same performance as a 6 target cap, with 100 players per faction in a keep, in the early days of Lag free cyrodiil.
Then you can have 10 players per faction on screen and in each other faces.
So is it any wonder when you go 24 v 24 v 24... all hitting optimum burst damage per tick... that the server dies ?
Restoring some sanity and server performace to cyrodiil.
To take AoE caps to their logical conclusion....the more they are raised... the bigger the groups form to counter the damage. Ad infinitum.
It is a never ending escalation with more and more lag as more and more calculations per tick are added.
Yet something needs to be done to stop group size escalation and reverse the trend.
The only option then is increasing damage to groups or reducing a groups mitigation, but we also need to hit all members of a group for 100% damage.
How does 6 targets become an effective cap when groups of 24 are legitimate ?
Why is 60 targets a reasonable cap considering the performance implications described above when the max group size should be 24 ?
What is the point of diminishing returns on Caps where 6x100% damage is just as effective as 12x50% damage yet option 1 halves the calculations required per tick ?
Clearly hitting more people for less damage neither helps destroy large groups nor helps with server load.
Ironically, with 6x100%, 24x50% and 30x25% we get an average damage of 60x42.5% or 2550% combined damage.
As 24x100% is of course 2400% combined damage, but its much more focused damage.
So using the full damage and group cap does pretty much the same damage as now yet requires only 40% of the current calculations per tick.
3 factions x 25 players x 24 targets = 1800 target calculations per tick
OK...this isnt quite the good old days of...
3 factions x 100 players x 6 targets = 1800 target calculations per tick
..but it does mean you can have 1 full size group from each faction going head to head in a keep.
So what do you want to see in Cyrodiil keep fights ?
Edited by Rune_Relic on November 25, 2015 12:42AM http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/89420/area-of-effect-abilities-maximum-target-cap-clarification/p1
All skills...
upto 6 targets @ 100%.
Except Alliance War...
Siege Weapons - Uncapped targets @ 100%.
Caltrops - 12 targets @ 100%.
Rapid Manoevers - Uncapped targets @ 100%.
War Horn - 24 targets @ 100%.
Barrier - 20 targets @ 100%.
Purge - Uncapped targets @ 100%.
Siege Shield - 20 targets @ 100%.
Patch 1.6 AoE Caps
http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/1506153#Comment_1506153
All skills...
1-6 targets @ 100%.
7-24 targets @ 50%.
30-60 targets @ 25%.
Average 1-60 @ 42.5%
Secondary effects hit...
upto 6 targets @ 100%
Forum requested changes for AoE caps to fix lag.
All skills..
upto 60 targets @ 100%.
Historical reality with the AoE caps.
Aside from a limited number of skills, all AoE was originally capped at 6 targets (except alliance war) even through beta (see link above).
Buffs are smart, but debuffs hit nearest to center of effect first.
After 1.1, performance began to degrade, but not to a large degree, until patch 1.3, where major lighting modifications and anti-cheat code was adopted on the server.
The exact details of the anti-cheat code are unknown, although it is common practice to move calculations from client to server to eliminate client hackers from making up their own values (like gold, items, xp, damage and location).
The Lighting patch was purported to have been thoroughly tested to check its impact on performance and found not to be the issue by ZOS.
This only leaves combat calcs being moved from the client to the server as part of the anti-cheat code introduced.
At this time the population of ESO was also growing with an inlfux of players from other MMOs.
Along with which came a growing trend to use balling and zerging tactics, which hadnt really been a major issue to begin with.
Like a virus introduced to a new environment, the problem snowballed to epidemic proportions.
Some saw it as protection from bigger groups.
Some saw it as an easy way to gain AP and the best gear quicker.
The result was an even greater increase in Lag and the reduction of server performance.
An arms race had begun on who could have the largest group with the highest burst damage.
By the time patch 1.5 hit, lag-trains were freely roaming cyrodiil and destroying eveything in their path.
The use of OP bugged AoE was rampant and completely capitalised on by these groups.
Many believed the damage mitigation afforded by group size simply made them invincible and invulnerable.
So the removal of AoE caps was demanded so that solo players could hit more than 6 @ 100% out of the upto 24 players groups who could hit upto 144 players @ 100% damage or 6 players @ 2400% damage (while sharing a smart healing/purging circle).
The argument was that the 24 man group could be wiped out quicker, so that the burst of damage calculations could be ended quicker.
I objected vehemently at the time and pointed out that people would just heal through more damage and the server would lag even more under all the extra calculations.
With Patch 1.6 came the effective removal of AoE caps but with limitations.
Upto 60 people could now be hit with each AoE, although only the first 6 took 100% damage.
The result was an instant and catastrophic disaster.
With a 10 fold increase on the damage calcs for the same number of players on screen, the server simply crumbled under the load.
The game became a freeze- frame slide show or powerpoint presentation.
ZOS solution to the problem (rather than revert the 60 people cap back to 6) was to respeatedly and massively cut the max population in any campaign.
Eventually when it was realised that even these drastic measures were not enough, they begged people to spread out and intoduced incentives to help encourage this.
People are now demanding that the AoE cap does 100% damage to all 60 people or even be unlimited so that everyone within the damage radius gets 100% damage (even if this was 500 people).
Why raising AoE caps does not fix lag.
Let start with some simple examples of the problem with AoE caps and server load.
Patch 1.1...
In the hay day of cyrodiil we could have 100 per faction on screen with one tick or hit every two seconds.
With single target skills this amounts to 3 factions x 100 players x 1 target = upto 300 target calculations per tick (part client-side).
Now we are going to go extreme and say everyone is going to use AoE in a keep with high density (although single target combat was much more frequent in early cyrodiil)
With a 6 target limit this amounts to 3 factions x 100 players x 6 target = upto 1800 target calculations per tick (part client-side).
Patch 1.3...
After Patch 1.3 at least some of the client side calculations were off loaded to the server only, creating delays in the calculations waiting for server response + network/tavel time.
With single target skills this amounts to 3 factions x 100 players x 1 target = upto 300 target calculations per tick (server-side).
Now we are going to go extreme and say everyone is going to use AoE in a keep with high density (by this time single target skills are becoming less and less popular with more group on group combat)
With a 6 target limit this amounts to 3 factions x 100 players x 6 target = upto 1,800 target calculations per tick (server-side).
Patch 1.6...
After patch 1.6 hits ball/zerg groups have become rampant. Many people now cluster merely to have some chance of survival as a result.
With single target skills this amounts to 3 factions x 100 players x 1 target = 300 target calculations per tick (server-side).
Now we are going to go extreme and say everyone is going to use AoE in a keep with high density (by this time single target skills are almost usless with little to no.. one on one combat)
With a 60 target limit this amounts to 3 factions x 100 players x 60 target = 18,000 target calculations per tick (server-side).
Anyone with a basic grasp of maths should see the problem here.
We have moved further and further away from one on ones.. 300 target calculations per tick (at early cyrodiil with no lag) to 18,000 target calculations per tick with nothing but group on group using AoE.
We have increased damage calcs alone by upto 60x that of the earliest campaigns.
Is it really a surpise Cyrdoiil is unplayable ?
To get group on group combat back down to 300 target calculations per tick requires....
3 factions x 1.67 players x 60 targets
Being generous and saying everyones using AoE now, so 1800 would be fair...
3 factions x 10 players x 60 targets
Yes thats right.
If you want a 60 target cap and the same performance as a 6 target cap, with 100 players per faction in a keep, in the early days of Lag free cyrodiil.
Then you can have 10 players per faction on screen and in each other faces.
So is it any wonder when you go 24 v 24 v 24... all hitting optimum burst damage per tick... that the server dies ?
Restoring some sanity and server performace to cyrodiil.
To take AoE caps to their logical conclusion....the more they are raised... the bigger the groups form to counter the damage. Ad infinitum.
It is a never ending escalation with more and more lag as more and more calculations per tick are added.
Yet something needs to be done to stop group size escalation and reverse the trend.
The only option then is increasing damage to groups or reducing a groups mitigation, but we also need to hit all members of a group for 100% damage.
How does 6 targets become an effective cap when groups of 24 are legitimate ?
Why is 60 targets a reasonable cap considering the performance implications described above when the max group size should be 24 ?
What is the point of diminishing returns on Caps where 6x100% damage is just as effective as 12x50% damage yet option 1 halves the calculations required per tick ?
Clearly hitting more people for less damage neither helps destroy large groups nor helps with server load.
Ironically, with 6x100%, 24x50% and 30x25% we get an average damage of 60x42.5% or 2550% combined damage.
As 24x100% is of course 2400% combined damage, but its much more focused damage.
So using the full damage and group cap does pretty much the same damage as now yet requires only 40% of the current calculations per tick.
3 factions x 25 players x 24 targets = 1800 target calculations per tick
OK...this isnt quite the good old days of...
3 factions x 100 players x 6 targets = 1800 target calculations per tick
..but it does mean you can have 1 full size group from each faction going head to head in a keep.
So what do you want to see in Cyrodiil keep fights ?
Anything that can be exploited will be exploited
My thoughs on AoE caps. What would you sacrifice ? 8 votes
3 factions x 150 players x 4 target cap & 4 man group limit
12%
1 vote
3 factions x 100 players x 6 target cap & 6 man group limit
12%
1 vote
3 factions x 50 players x 12 target cap & 12 man group limit
62%
5 votes
3 factions x 25 players x 24 target cap & 24 man group limit
0%
0 votes
3 factions x 10 players x 60 target cap & 60 man group limit
12%
1 vote
1
-
Artjuh90✭✭✭✭✭
✭don't remove aoe caps without adding the softcaps you forgot to mention.
tanks will be even less viable without caps...
but then again PVP community already killed them in PvP and PvE2 -
prootch✭✭✭Decrease aoe damage drastically and kill aoe spam lagtrains
So your vote proposals needs some adjustment
Edited by prootch on November 27, 2015 7:51AM0 -
Remove all AOE (damage and Healing) in Cyrodiil.
Problem solved.
I want ESO PVP to become like this...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GixDXD44_yA&feature=youtu.be&t=149 Edited by Forumer-in-Prison on November 27, 2015 7:55AMSiblings-in-Prison
Lore:At a time of chaos and turmoil, children from all across tamriel have been taken by an evil Argonian Thieves guild. They were raised in captivity, forced to learn their captors evil ways and endured the harsh environment of Black Marsh. The intentions of the evil guild is still unknown till this day.
Amisdt the events surrounding the formation of the Ebonheart Pact, a brave few has escaped their captors and ran off as far away as they can, eventually landing on the shores of khenarthi's roost.
Armed with the skills and the scars they have endured during their captivity, these brothers and sisters in chains has vowed revenge on their Argonian captors and their allies.
They kept the names branded to them by the evil reptiles as a reminder of all the pain and torment they have suffered, and have joined the Aldmeri Dominion as a means to an end... Paint Tamriel with Argonian blood.
[*] Sliced-in-Prison | Bosmer | Suction Blade
[*] Hunk-in-Prison | Breton | Hunky Blade
[*] Muse-in-Prison | Altmer | Healing Babe
[*] Hot-in-Prison | Breton | HotBod Killer2 -
Muizer✭✭✭✭✭
✭For me the whole problem with the AoE cap debate is that it stems from the notion that to a few should have the ability to kill the many. That exists in modern warfare, yes.Artillery, bombs.......... Thing is, I don't want ESO battles to be resemble modern warfare. Devs should look to pre-modern times for inspiration instead and model-in not just the strengths, but also the weaknesses "balling up" used to have back then. And that has nothing to do with being vulnderable to high explosives.Please stop making requests for game features. ZOS have enough bad ideas as it is!0 -
Xsorus✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Remove AOE caps
There..that's it
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXpX7JMwRXtczc5GTrIYRIw
ESO and GW2 PvP videos1 -
hrothbern✭✭✭✭✭
✭don't remove aoe caps without adding the softcaps you forgot to mention.
tanks will be even less viable without caps...
but then again PVP community already killed them in PvP and PvE
Killed ... yes....
But NOT on the battlefields, but by talking."I still do not understand why I followed the advice of Captain Rana to bring the villagers of Bleakrock into safety. We should have fought for our village and not have backed down, with our tail between our legs. Now my home village is in shambles, the houses burning, the invaders feasting.I swear every day to Shor that after Molag Bal has been defeated, I will hunt down the invaders and restore peace in Bleakrock and drink my mead with my friends at the market place".PC-EU0 -
Rune_Relic✭✭✭✭✭
✭Forumer-in-Prison wrote: »Remove all AOE (damage and Healing) in Cyrodiil.
Problem solved.
I want ESO PVP to become like this...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GixDXD44_yA&feature=youtu.be&t=149
The problem there is you have the PVE community encouraged to develop and use group tactics.
They specialise into certain roles and they aren't compatible to standalone in Cyrodiil.
Imagine a dedicated healer.
Some of these players choose these roles as they aren't comfortable performing others and aren't very good at them.
For them the option is to form a group and let a tank healer and dps cover each others weaknesses and stick to what they are good at.
They pretty much rely on AoE as a form of compensation to allow each other to exist as a team.
Despite the arguments, we do actually want PVE players to venture into PVP and vice versa.
A fractured game is a fractured community.
BUT yes.....if the AoE cap was set to "1" there would be absolutely "0 LAG"
Anything that can be exploited will be exploited0 -
Rune_Relic✭✭✭✭✭
✭For me the whole problem with the AoE cap debate is that it stems from the notion that to a few should have the ability to kill the many. That exists in modern warfare, yes.Artillery, bombs.......... Thing is, I don't want ESO battles to be resemble modern warfare. Devs should look to pre-modern times for inspiration instead and model-in not just the strengths, but also the weaknesses "balling up" used to have back then. And that has nothing to do with being vulnderable to high explosives.
Completely agree I think.
The whole point of the combat mechanics at the end of the day is so that all playstyles and builds can actually co-exist.
If some play style dominates...there isn't any co existence.
Every other playstyle might as well just pack up and leave if the dominant playstyle isn't bought back into line.
Think of the dominance of the original Dragon Knight + Ultgain.
That's the problem at the moment with the unlimited group size, very high AoE caps and zergballs.
Edited by Rune_Relic on November 27, 2015 12:46PMAnything that can be exploited will be exploited0 -
Rune_Relic✭✭✭✭✭
✭@Xsorus ...cant quote for some reason.....Remove AOE caps
There..that's it
I will try to show you why this is a bad idea.
You probably will ignore this....but I will say it anyway.
compuversal.com/eso/aoe-caps.pdf
First a quick question.
Do you really believe there would be any Lag whatsoever if all AoE caps were set at 1 ?
If you are half as intelligent as I thought you to be....then you hopefully answered that there would be no lag.
The reason being the AoE is working pretty much the same as single target skills.
Then you will understand the attached pdf and the consequences of unlimited group size and unlimited aoe caps.
Every time you hit something it send an update from client to the server, the server checks validity and updates your resources and the targets resources, and sends two update packets to the clients to update themselves.
So if there are 1000 players on screen, all hitting each other every tick, using single target skills or AoE skills capped at one, then there will be 1000 packets/tick or 500 packets/second going through the megaserver to the client (just in your area and your campaign alone).
There is no lag here.
The server network can handle this kind of traffic no problem.
This is why we had 100s of players on screen in beta without much issue.
No we are going to up the AoE cap to 6 and all 6 targets will be hit. AoE will become more and more popular over time.
Player population and thus player density will also increase with game popularity and prime time.
if 10 players are using aoe and 990 players are using single target.... 10x6 + 990x1 = 1050 packets /tick = 525 packets/s
if 100 players are using aoe and 900 players are using single target.... 100x6 + 900x1 = 1500 packets /tick = 750 packets/s
if 500 players are using aoe and 500 players are using single target.... 500x6 + 500x1 = 3500 packets /tick = 1750 packets/s
if 900 players are using aoe and 100 players are using single target.... 900x6 + 100x1 = 5500 packets /tick = 2750 packets/s
ZOS already clearly stated they don't have a problem with large numbers of players causing lag....only with burst traffic.
That burst traffic is created by players hitting considerably more players per tick.
The max amount of players that can be hit per tick is 100% dependant on AoE caps and player density.
No we are going to up the AoE cap to 60 and all 60 targets will be hit.
if 10 players are using aoe and 990 players are using single target.... 10x60 + 990x1 = 1590 packets /tick = 795 packets/s
if 100 players are using aoe and 900 players are using single target.... 100x60 + 900x1 = 6900 packets /tick = 3450 packets/s
[Notice with just 100 players using AoE @ 60 cap I am making more traffic than 900 players using AoE @ 6 cap]
if 500 players are using aoe and 500 players are using single target.... 500x60 + 500x1 = 30500 packets /tick = 15250 packets/s
if 900 players are using aoe and 100 players are using single target.... 900x60 + 100x1 = 54100 packets /tick = 27050 packets/s
You hopefully realise this is perfectly consistent with the evolution of Lag from Beta through to now.
With Cyrodiil performance utterly destroyed when caps were raised from 6 to 60 in 1.6
Server performance really doesn't give a crap about who lives or dies or diminishing returns....only how many packets it has to send and receive for client updates.
If ZOS made caps unlimited, the bigger the group, the greater the multiplyer on the Radius of the AoE they are using. A 100 man group can carpet bomb 100x the area of the the original AoE. But instead of only hitting 600 or even worse 6000 players with every tick......with unlimited AoE I will hit everyone within that increased radius without fail.
So that 10m radius AoE becomes a 100m radius AoE (square root group size x radius).
And any players that are problematic can be focused down...so that ALL PLAYERS within a 10m radius can be blown up with 100x base AoE damage per tick.
The only winner here is the biggest bomb group. Through sustained carpet bombing a massive area or melting anything of choice instantly AND ANYWHERE IN BETWEEN.
I don't know about you.....but that's not where I want cyrodiil PVP to be.
The only way to stop this is to;
1. get a handle on AoE Caps again.
2. limit group size (problematic) or limit the max hits per tick that can land on any player.Anything that can be exploited will be exploited0 -
RAGUNAnoOne✭✭✭✭✭
✭Rune_Relic wrote: »Forumer-in-Prison wrote: »Remove all AOE (damage and Healing) in Cyrodiil.
Problem solved.
I want ESO PVP to become like this...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GixDXD44_yA&feature=youtu.be&t=149
The problem there is you have the PVE community encouraged to develop and use group tactics.
They specialise into certain roles and they aren't compatible to standalone in Cyrodiil.
Imagine a dedicated healer.
Some of these players choose these roles as they aren't comfortable performing others and aren't very good at them.
For them the option is to form a group and let a tank healer and dps cover each others weaknesses and stick to what they are good at.
They pretty much rely on AoE as a form of compensation to allow each other to exist as a team.
Despite the arguments, we do actually want PVE players to venture into PVP and vice versa.
A fractured game is a fractured community.
BUT yes.....if the AoE cap was set to "1" there would be absolutely "0 LAG"
it would really help then if you oh I don't know A stop calling people "*** carebears" and B instead of 7 NBs ganking at once in quest hubs why not have one that will actually try a honorable duel on occasion. the only reason that I am not 100% turned off by PvP was because my first experience was battling an AD inside that Bruma building. if it wasn't for the terrain allowing me to effectively cut off his/her storm atronach I would have lost but it was the only fun PvP moment I ever had.PS4 NA
Argonian Master Race
PAWS (Positively Against Wrip-off Stuff) - Say No to Crown Crates!
Support Tail armor and tail ribbons: http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/236333/concept-tail-armor-for-beast-races#latest
http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/246134/request-dyeable-tail-ribbons0 -
Maim✭✭Player collision please. watch as those full raid (plus) 'ball zergs' stop occupying 1 square inch on the map. Then AoE caps make sense, as players who are spread out actually facilitate a 'realistic' feel to combat and mechanics, and the calculations might actually become easier, as I'm sure figuring who, exactly, becomes designated as the first set of people to be hit at 100%, then the next, etc.
I'd also like to see population capping implemented with this - 40 of one faction enters cyrodiil, then 40 of another faction is allowed in, and whoever shows up for the 3rd faction can fill out any number up to 40, WITH a ratio of +/- to help with queuing. Too many times its been 15-20 against 15-20....then BAM its 60 vs 20, ballzerging the whole time as these pvp 'guilds' (almost think theres a couple of multiboxers running around) show up and everything goes through the roof (lag being one of them). Have a group of 40? Great, wait as 40 players from at least one of the factions is Q'd and ready to go to even out the numbers. This coupled with having a Home campaign ONLY, with overflow having the CHOICE of any campaign to sit in, in the meantime (you don't get rewards from guest anyways - pick one you have friends in) whilst continuing to Q for the Main campaign to give you that option if you choose it. Remove population as counting as soon as people enter IC as well - poplocked, but 90% is farming sewers?
Also, what would be wrong with a PVP ONLY campaign? Strip out the pve content, remove IC pve (James Bond Golden Eye Battles in tunnels?) Get rid of anything that isn't relatable to PLAVER versus PLAYER, and potentially increase the PLAYER versus PLAYER reward bonus in lieu of that aspect. Make it worthwhile to not enter Cyrodiil to ROLEPLAY.
Anyways, I keep hearing sheep bleating that AoE caps are the be all and end all to fixing EVERYTHING that's wrong. Ever think there may be more to it?0 -
Rune_Relic✭✭✭✭✭
✭RAGUNAnoOne wrote: »Rune_Relic wrote: »Forumer-in-Prison wrote: »Remove all AOE (damage and Healing) in Cyrodiil.
Problem solved.
I want ESO PVP to become like this...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GixDXD44_yA&feature=youtu.be&t=149
The problem there is you have the PVE community encouraged to develop and use group tactics.
They specialise into certain roles and they aren't compatible to standalone in Cyrodiil.
Imagine a dedicated healer.
Some of these players choose these roles as they aren't comfortable performing others and aren't very good at them.
For them the option is to form a group and let a tank healer and dps cover each others weaknesses and stick to what they are good at.
They pretty much rely on AoE as a form of compensation to allow each other to exist as a team.
Despite the arguments, we do actually want PVE players to venture into PVP and vice versa.
A fractured game is a fractured community.
BUT yes.....if the AoE cap was set to "1" there would be absolutely "0 LAG"
it would really help then if you oh I don't know A stop calling people "*** carebears" and B instead of 7 NBs ganking at once in quest hubs why not have one that will actually try a honorable duel on occasion. the only reason that I am not 100% turned off by PvP was because my first experience was battling an AD inside that Bruma building. if it wasn't for the terrain allowing me to effectively cut off his/her storm atronach I would have lost but it was the only fun PvP moment I ever had.
I happily float between PVP and PVE. At least I would if PVP was playable.
I have never personally called PVE players carebears.
That would be hypocritical really.
I am not happy about the quest hub ganking myself and suggested safe areas around NPCs a long time ago.
I would rather the PVE players experiment outside of the quest hubs then PVP players give them a rude awakening.
Unfortunately, as you said, many players are just from the COD era and want as many kills as possible as quick as possible and with regard PVE players.....as easy as possible (experience wise).
Part of the beauty of PVP is you can actually go back and punish those bruma gankers if you had the inclination
If they were that good they wouldn't be looking for easy pickings.
The only time I actually recall being really annoyed at PVE players was...due to the lag....due to the aoe cap rise....ZOS massively cut the population of the campaigns. The result was there was just as many PVE questers as PVP players and we couldn't defend anything as PVE players weren't interested in making up the lost numbers. Had the campaign sizes not been so heavily cut....the PVE players wouldn't have made up so a large % of the total population.Edited by Rune_Relic on November 27, 2015 3:35PMAnything that can be exploited will be exploited0 -
Rune_Relic✭✭✭✭✭
✭Player collision please. watch as those full raid (plus) 'ball zergs' stop occupying 1 square inch on the map. Then AoE caps make sense, as players who are spread out actually facilitate a 'realistic' feel to combat and mechanics, and the calculations might actually become easier, as I'm sure figuring who, exactly, becomes designated as the first set of people to be hit at 100%, then the next, etc.
I'd also like to see population capping implemented with this - 40 of one faction enters cyrodiil, then 40 of another faction is allowed in, and whoever shows up for the 3rd faction can fill out any number up to 40, WITH a ratio of +/- to help with queuing. Too many times its been 15-20 against 15-20....then BAM its 60 vs 20, ballzerging the whole time as these pvp 'guilds' (almost think theres a couple of multiboxers running around) show up and everything goes through the roof (lag being one of them). Have a group of 40? Great, wait as 40 players from at least one of the factions is Q'd and ready to go to even out the numbers. This coupled with having a Home campaign ONLY, with overflow having the CHOICE of any campaign to sit in, in the meantime (you don't get rewards from guest anyways - pick one you have friends in) whilst continuing to Q for the Main campaign to give you that option if you choose it. Remove population as counting as soon as people enter IC as well - poplocked, but 90% is farming sewers?
Also, what would be wrong with a PVP ONLY campaign? Strip out the pve content, remove IC pve (James Bond Golden Eye Battles in tunnels?) Get rid of anything that isn't relatable to PLAVER versus PLAYER, and potentially increase the PLAYER versus PLAYER reward bonus in lieu of that aspect. Make it worthwhile to not enter Cyrodiil to ROLEPLAY.
Anyways, I keep hearing sheep bleating that AoE caps are the be all and end all to fixing EVERYTHING that's wrong. Ever think there may be more to it?
I was a proponent of CD myself.
The community believed trolling was too much of a problem along with the load caused by the physics engine with so many players.
At least I helped CD stay in the PVE zone.
So next time you smack into an NPC.....remember it wasn't always that way.
I also suggested soft CD to avoid the physics use.
Standing in someones space would drain your health/magicka/stamina.
This meant it was left upto the players to avoid collision rather than other players force them apart with OP AoE.
No different to standing in a groundfire really.
The sheep have a loud voice....but its their shepherds that are the problem.
They only repeat what they are told.
Regardless of the lack of evidence.
There was a time when you would have 100s of players around you in any campaign.
And if AoE caps were 1....you could have zerg balls of 100 and still get no lag.
Wouldn't stop people being melted though.
Same reason a 100 solo players could target 1 player and melt them...regardless of no group.Edited by Rune_Relic on November 27, 2015 3:55PMAnything that can be exploited will be exploited1 -
Joy_Division✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭All this is is your made up calculations.
You claim, without evidence of a 10 fold increase of server calculations up calculations with the removal of a hard AoE Cap of six, which is contrary to what most people intuitively believe and what has been the most vigorous methodology testing caluclations and the server cap done here: http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/224997/myth-aoe-cap/p1
The burden is on you to demonstrate otherwise.
Also your memory is faulty. The reason the AoE cap change from 1.5 to 1.6 was unappreciated because ball-groups had long ago tanked the servers (remember "wabbalag" - he name devised for a campaign long-since removed before 1.6) and the majority of the community who has always hated AoE caps pointed of that the 1.6 modification was still an AOE cap, would not reduce server calculations, and would not change the Meta.Make Rush of Agony "Monsters only." People should not be consecutively crowd controlled in a PvP setting. Period.0 -
Maim✭✭Rune - good feedback. One point: smacking into NPC's. I do it every time I have to rez at a keep. I'm pointed towards the door, and pressing forward immediately runs me into a transitus guard. I'm stuck there until I navigate around them. It's an object, players need to be objects as well for PvP. I think of it like traffic. You don't see me wisping through the multitude of vehicles in my path while trying to drive somewhere. Trying something like that results in collision......
One thing I forgot to mention was fixing animation cancelling, as I'm sure its over use and abuse of this flawed mechanic is NOT helping in any capacity. I know ZoS said they probably wont be doing anything about this, but having been privy to a conversation a friend had with an employee, and having witnessed on more than one occasion the absurdity of this 'mechanic' I (and probably more than a few people, that aren't exploiting the hell out of it) feel this needs to go. They found a way to stop some skills from being cancelled, why aren't ALL of them being treated in this way? 2-4 high DPS maneouvers being executed in less time than the first animation would have completed, only to have all of them count as a single hit? Pretty sure that the exponential rise in using this (as it became so widespread and known about)and the exponential rise in lag may go hand in hand. Seems every time I have seen this implemented, and subsequently killed by it, I 'de-sync' a little bit with the game: interacting with things like doors or npcs becomes an impossibility until corrected.
In keeping with the spirit of this thread, it being about AoE caps and all.....
Sorry but the only thing I ever got from the outcrying about its removal was that certain singular players were complaining that they were unable to devastate whole groups of opposing players because of this system. I guess Rambo would be upset too if his one and only grenade didn't wipe out the whole entirety of the VC army.......2 -
RustedValor✭✭✭Removing the AOE caps would make the battles end much quicker with ball groups, which would reduce the lag overall. Good luck healing through all that damage.Edited by RustedValor on November 27, 2015 4:34PM0
-
Maim✭✭Either the link is broken or its working as intended...
An error occurred. Please try again later. Learn More.
If working as intended then, yes, that's what it looks like at this point in time.....0 -
Xsorus✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Rune_Relic wrote: »@Xsorus ...cant quote for some reason.....Remove AOE caps
There..that's it
I will try to show you why this is a bad idea.
You probably will ignore this....but I will say it anyway.
compuversal.com/eso/aoe-caps.pdf
First a quick question.
Do you really believe there would be any Lag whatsoever if all AoE caps were set at 1 ?
If you are half as intelligent as I thought you to be....then you hopefully answered that there would be no lag.
The reason being the AoE is working pretty much the same as single target skills.
Then you will understand the attached pdf and the consequences of unlimited group size and unlimited aoe caps.
Every time you hit something it send an update from client to the server, the server checks validity and updates your resources and the targets resources, and sends two update packets to the clients to update themselves.
So if there are 1000 players on screen, all hitting each other every tick, using single target skills or AoE skills capped at one, then there will be 1000 packets/tick or 500 packets/second going through the megaserver to the client (just in your area and your campaign alone).
There is no lag here.
The server network can handle this kind of traffic no problem.
This is why we had 100s of players on screen in beta without much issue.
No we are going to up the AoE cap to 6 and all 6 targets will be hit. AoE will become more and more popular over time.
Player population and thus player density will also increase with game popularity and prime time.
if 10 players are using aoe and 990 players are using single target.... 10x6 + 990x1 = 1050 packets /tick = 525 packets/s
if 100 players are using aoe and 900 players are using single target.... 100x6 + 900x1 = 1500 packets /tick = 750 packets/s
if 500 players are using aoe and 500 players are using single target.... 500x6 + 500x1 = 3500 packets /tick = 1750 packets/s
if 900 players are using aoe and 100 players are using single target.... 900x6 + 100x1 = 5500 packets /tick = 2750 packets/s
ZOS already clearly stated they don't have a problem with large numbers of players causing lag....only with burst traffic.
That burst traffic is created by players hitting considerably more players per tick.
The max amount of players that can be hit per tick is 100% dependant on AoE caps and player density.
No we are going to up the AoE cap to 60 and all 60 targets will be hit.
if 10 players are using aoe and 990 players are using single target.... 10x60 + 990x1 = 1590 packets /tick = 795 packets/s
if 100 players are using aoe and 900 players are using single target.... 100x60 + 900x1 = 6900 packets /tick = 3450 packets/s
[Notice with just 100 players using AoE @ 60 cap I am making more traffic than 900 players using AoE @ 6 cap]
if 500 players are using aoe and 500 players are using single target.... 500x60 + 500x1 = 30500 packets /tick = 15250 packets/s
if 900 players are using aoe and 100 players are using single target.... 900x60 + 100x1 = 54100 packets /tick = 27050 packets/s
You hopefully realise this is perfectly consistent with the evolution of Lag from Beta through to now.
With Cyrodiil performance utterly destroyed when caps were raised from 6 to 60 in 1.6
Server performance really doesn't give a crap about who lives or dies or diminishing returns....only how many packets it has to send and receive for client updates.
If ZOS made caps unlimited, the bigger the group, the greater the multiplyer on the Radius of the AoE they are using. A 100 man group can carpet bomb 100x the area of the the original AoE. But instead of only hitting 600 or even worse 6000 players with every tick......with unlimited AoE I will hit everyone within that increased radius without fail.
So that 10m radius AoE becomes a 100m radius AoE (square root group size x radius).
And any players that are problematic can be focused down...so that ALL PLAYERS within a 10m radius can be blown up with 100x base AoE damage per tick.
The only winner here is the biggest bomb group. Through sustained carpet bombing a massive area or melting anything of choice instantly AND ANYWHERE IN BETWEEN.
I don't know about you.....but that's not where I want cyrodiil PVP to be.
The only way to stop this is to;
1. get a handle on AoE Caps again.
2. limit group size (problematic) or limit the max hits per tick that can land on any player.
You realize you can hit more then 6 people right now with AOEs correct?
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXpX7JMwRXtczc5GTrIYRIw
ESO and GW2 PvP videos0 -
Rune_Relic✭✭✭✭✭
✭Rune_Relic wrote: »@Xsorus ...cant quote for some reason.....Remove AOE caps
There..that's it
I will try to show you why this is a bad idea.
You probably will ignore this....but I will say it anyway.
compuversal.com/eso/aoe-caps.pdf
First a quick question.
Do you really believe there would be any Lag whatsoever if all AoE caps were set at 1 ?
If you are half as intelligent as I thought you to be....then you hopefully answered that there would be no lag.
The reason being the AoE is working pretty much the same as single target skills.
Then you will understand the attached pdf and the consequences of unlimited group size and unlimited aoe caps.
Every time you hit something it send an update from client to the server, the server checks validity and updates your resources and the targets resources, and sends two update packets to the clients to update themselves.
So if there are 1000 players on screen, all hitting each other every tick, using single target skills or AoE skills capped at one, then there will be 1000 packets/tick or 500 packets/second going through the megaserver to the client (just in your area and your campaign alone).
There is no lag here.
The server network can handle this kind of traffic no problem.
This is why we had 100s of players on screen in beta without much issue.
No we are going to up the AoE cap to 6 and all 6 targets will be hit. AoE will become more and more popular over time.
Player population and thus player density will also increase with game popularity and prime time.
if 10 players are using aoe and 990 players are using single target.... 10x6 + 990x1 = 1050 packets /tick = 525 packets/s
if 100 players are using aoe and 900 players are using single target.... 100x6 + 900x1 = 1500 packets /tick = 750 packets/s
if 500 players are using aoe and 500 players are using single target.... 500x6 + 500x1 = 3500 packets /tick = 1750 packets/s
if 900 players are using aoe and 100 players are using single target.... 900x6 + 100x1 = 5500 packets /tick = 2750 packets/s
ZOS already clearly stated they don't have a problem with large numbers of players causing lag....only with burst traffic.
That burst traffic is created by players hitting considerably more players per tick.
The max amount of players that can be hit per tick is 100% dependant on AoE caps and player density.
No we are going to up the AoE cap to 60 and all 60 targets will be hit.
if 10 players are using aoe and 990 players are using single target.... 10x60 + 990x1 = 1590 packets /tick = 795 packets/s
if 100 players are using aoe and 900 players are using single target.... 100x60 + 900x1 = 6900 packets /tick = 3450 packets/s
[Notice with just 100 players using AoE @ 60 cap I am making more traffic than 900 players using AoE @ 6 cap]
if 500 players are using aoe and 500 players are using single target.... 500x60 + 500x1 = 30500 packets /tick = 15250 packets/s
if 900 players are using aoe and 100 players are using single target.... 900x60 + 100x1 = 54100 packets /tick = 27050 packets/s
You hopefully realise this is perfectly consistent with the evolution of Lag from Beta through to now.
With Cyrodiil performance utterly destroyed when caps were raised from 6 to 60 in 1.6
Server performance really doesn't give a crap about who lives or dies or diminishing returns....only how many packets it has to send and receive for client updates.
If ZOS made caps unlimited, the bigger the group, the greater the multiplyer on the Radius of the AoE they are using. A 100 man group can carpet bomb 100x the area of the the original AoE. But instead of only hitting 600 or even worse 6000 players with every tick......with unlimited AoE I will hit everyone within that increased radius without fail.
So that 10m radius AoE becomes a 100m radius AoE (square root group size x radius).
And any players that are problematic can be focused down...so that ALL PLAYERS within a 10m radius can be blown up with 100x base AoE damage per tick.
The only winner here is the biggest bomb group. Through sustained carpet bombing a massive area or melting anything of choice instantly AND ANYWHERE IN BETWEEN.
I don't know about you.....but that's not where I want cyrodiil PVP to be.
The only way to stop this is to;
1. get a handle on AoE Caps again.
2. limit group size (problematic) or limit the max hits per tick that can land on any player.
You realize you can hit more then 6 people right now with AOEs correct?
hhhmmm.. Didn't think you would read the thread but you might have actually considered reading the quoted... AoE cap at 6 above pre 1.6 and AoE cap at 60 above post 1.6, which absolutely killed performance in Cyrodiil.
..because ...well ....cap went from 6 to 60.
So how much traffic (server client updates) do you think you will generate with NO CAP on AoE targets ?
Especially considering the bigger the group the greater you can multiply the AoE radius ?
I am not just talking about that 24 man group you are targetting but the other 50 or so players standing on the flag that aren't actually in that ball group you are trying to kill....but just ...you know ...fighting ..because keep.
I take it that's why you want NO CAP rather than a 24 man cap @ 100%.
Edited by Rune_Relic on November 27, 2015 6:30PMAnything that can be exploited will be exploited0 -
Rune_Relic✭✭✭✭✭
✭RustedValor wrote: »Removing the AOE caps would make the battles end much quicker with ball groups, which would reduce the lag overall. Good luck healing through all that damage.
Ah.. IF YOU KILL THE BALL GROUP QUICKER....lag will be reduced.
And what about all the other players around the ball group you are hitting adding to the server client updates ?
You know....the UNLIMITED players you can now hit.
I think you should have just said I want to 1vX and screw lag. At least that would be honest.
Do you think 36% more damage matters when 10 players can target you for 1000% damage if they all target you at the same time ?
Edited by Rune_Relic on November 27, 2015 6:38PMAnything that can be exploited will be exploited0 -
Holycannoli✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Player collision please. watch as those full raid (plus) 'ball zergs' stop occupying 1 square inch on the map. Then AoE caps make sense, as players who are spread out actually facilitate a 'realistic' feel to combat and mechanics, and the calculations might actually become easier, as I'm sure figuring who, exactly, becomes designated as the first set of people to be hit at 100%, then the next, etc.
Player collision can be worse on the server than no AOE caps, that's the problem.
But yeah ideally there has to be one or the other. We either need player collision or no AOE caps because otherwise the meta is everyone stacking in a tiny spot to counter AOE, which is just ass backwards.
"Air raid incoming! Everyone huddle real close together out in the field!"
That's pretty much what's going on.0 -
Xsorus✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Rune_Relic wrote: »Rune_Relic wrote: »@Xsorus ...cant quote for some reason.....Remove AOE caps
There..that's it
I will try to show you why this is a bad idea.
You probably will ignore this....but I will say it anyway.
compuversal.com/eso/aoe-caps.pdf
First a quick question.
Do you really believe there would be any Lag whatsoever if all AoE caps were set at 1 ?
If you are half as intelligent as I thought you to be....then you hopefully answered that there would be no lag.
The reason being the AoE is working pretty much the same as single target skills.
Then you will understand the attached pdf and the consequences of unlimited group size and unlimited aoe caps.
Every time you hit something it send an update from client to the server, the server checks validity and updates your resources and the targets resources, and sends two update packets to the clients to update themselves.
So if there are 1000 players on screen, all hitting each other every tick, using single target skills or AoE skills capped at one, then there will be 1000 packets/tick or 500 packets/second going through the megaserver to the client (just in your area and your campaign alone).
There is no lag here.
The server network can handle this kind of traffic no problem.
This is why we had 100s of players on screen in beta without much issue.
No we are going to up the AoE cap to 6 and all 6 targets will be hit. AoE will become more and more popular over time.
Player population and thus player density will also increase with game popularity and prime time.
if 10 players are using aoe and 990 players are using single target.... 10x6 + 990x1 = 1050 packets /tick = 525 packets/s
if 100 players are using aoe and 900 players are using single target.... 100x6 + 900x1 = 1500 packets /tick = 750 packets/s
if 500 players are using aoe and 500 players are using single target.... 500x6 + 500x1 = 3500 packets /tick = 1750 packets/s
if 900 players are using aoe and 100 players are using single target.... 900x6 + 100x1 = 5500 packets /tick = 2750 packets/s
ZOS already clearly stated they don't have a problem with large numbers of players causing lag....only with burst traffic.
That burst traffic is created by players hitting considerably more players per tick.
The max amount of players that can be hit per tick is 100% dependant on AoE caps and player density.
No we are going to up the AoE cap to 60 and all 60 targets will be hit.
if 10 players are using aoe and 990 players are using single target.... 10x60 + 990x1 = 1590 packets /tick = 795 packets/s
if 100 players are using aoe and 900 players are using single target.... 100x60 + 900x1 = 6900 packets /tick = 3450 packets/s
[Notice with just 100 players using AoE @ 60 cap I am making more traffic than 900 players using AoE @ 6 cap]
if 500 players are using aoe and 500 players are using single target.... 500x60 + 500x1 = 30500 packets /tick = 15250 packets/s
if 900 players are using aoe and 100 players are using single target.... 900x60 + 100x1 = 54100 packets /tick = 27050 packets/s
You hopefully realise this is perfectly consistent with the evolution of Lag from Beta through to now.
With Cyrodiil performance utterly destroyed when caps were raised from 6 to 60 in 1.6
Server performance really doesn't give a crap about who lives or dies or diminishing returns....only how many packets it has to send and receive for client updates.
If ZOS made caps unlimited, the bigger the group, the greater the multiplyer on the Radius of the AoE they are using. A 100 man group can carpet bomb 100x the area of the the original AoE. But instead of only hitting 600 or even worse 6000 players with every tick......with unlimited AoE I will hit everyone within that increased radius without fail.
So that 10m radius AoE becomes a 100m radius AoE (square root group size x radius).
And any players that are problematic can be focused down...so that ALL PLAYERS within a 10m radius can be blown up with 100x base AoE damage per tick.
The only winner here is the biggest bomb group. Through sustained carpet bombing a massive area or melting anything of choice instantly AND ANYWHERE IN BETWEEN.
I don't know about you.....but that's not where I want cyrodiil PVP to be.
The only way to stop this is to;
1. get a handle on AoE Caps again.
2. limit group size (problematic) or limit the max hits per tick that can land on any player.
You realize you can hit more then 6 people right now with AOEs correct?
hhhmmm.. Didn't think you would read the thread but you might have actually considered reading the quoted... AoE cap at 6 above pre 1.6 and AoE cap at 60 above post 1.6, which absolutely killed performance in Cyrodiil.
..because ...well ....cap went from 6 to 60.
So how much traffic (server client updates) do you think you will generate with NO CAP on AoE targets ?
Especially considering the bigger the group the greater you can multiply the AoE radius ?
I am not just talking about that 24 man group you are targetting but the other 50 or so players standing on the flag that aren't actually in that ball group you are trying to kill....but just ...you know ...fighting ..because keep.
I take it that's why you want NO CAP rather than a 24 man cap @ 100%.
Um.....No
This game has been laggy ever since they announced AOE caps
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBxXjYjgSIc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2BqTrX8zVk
This is pre 1.6....
You may notice Siege and my abilities aren't going off...That's because the server is bloody lagged to hell and back...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z80NOqSLx94
Now go to 18:45 in this video
This is back when Fragmented Shield with pretty anti zerg ball... Basically you could hit 6 people with your Frag Shield; and it could be knocked off on those 6 people..and each of those 6 people would set off an pbae nuke that could hit 6 people....So just spamming it meant that Zerg Balls could eat it pretty hard...Notice how no lag happens despite there being a fairly large stacked group running up the stairs to bomb us...That's because they bloody instant died.
Edited by Xsorus on November 27, 2015 6:43PMhttps://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXpX7JMwRXtczc5GTrIYRIw
ESO and GW2 PvP videos0 -
I did not even need to read your explanation TLDR;Rune_Relic wrote: »@Xsorus ...cant quote for some reason.....Remove AOE caps
There..that's it
I will try to show you why this is a bad idea.
You probably will ignore this....but I will say it anyway.
compuversal.com/eso/aoe-caps.pdf
Your PDF explains it all in one glance. Good job. You need to forward that to ESO GM'sEdited by Forumer-in-Prison on December 1, 2015 2:46AMSiblings-in-Prison
Lore:At a time of chaos and turmoil, children from all across tamriel have been taken by an evil Argonian Thieves guild. They were raised in captivity, forced to learn their captors evil ways and endured the harsh environment of Black Marsh. The intentions of the evil guild is still unknown till this day.
Amisdt the events surrounding the formation of the Ebonheart Pact, a brave few has escaped their captors and ran off as far away as they can, eventually landing on the shores of khenarthi's roost.
Armed with the skills and the scars they have endured during their captivity, these brothers and sisters in chains has vowed revenge on their Argonian captors and their allies.
They kept the names branded to them by the evil reptiles as a reminder of all the pain and torment they have suffered, and have joined the Aldmeri Dominion as a means to an end... Paint Tamriel with Argonian blood.
[*] Sliced-in-Prison | Bosmer | Suction Blade
[*] Hunk-in-Prison | Breton | Hunky Blade
[*] Muse-in-Prison | Altmer | Healing Babe
[*] Hot-in-Prison | Breton | HotBod Killer0 -
Yolokin_Swagonborn✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Aren't they still going to have to have secondary effect caps unless you want talons rooting 100 people. So the calculations that we have now will still have to be in the game. If you still have to run LOS and number checks for secondary effects then we will still have server side overhead caused by AOE.Edited by Yolokin_Swagonborn on December 1, 2015 5:23AM0 -
Rune_Relic✭✭✭✭✭
✭Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »Aren't they still going to have to have secondary effect caps unless you want talons rooting 100 people. So the calculations that we have now will still have to be in the game. If you still have to run LOS and number checks for secondary effects then we will still have server side overhead caused by AOE.
Yes. All AoE.... primary/secondary has to have Caps.
If you don't cap it you have no regulation of the traffic flow from ZOS servers to the clients (clients hit / tick).
You just end up with a network storm choking the bandwidth....so no client gets any updates without serious delays.
When player density is so low you cant hit anymore than 1 target at a time with uncapped AoE....it doesn't matter as you can only hit 1 target / tick (per player).
But when player density increases (ie flags, ball groups, prime time, scroll capture, keep taking), you start hitting way more people than 1 target / tick (per player).
That's when the server dies.
It simply can not service the extra demand caused by the number of players hit / tick (with the current AoE caps).
There wil be a sweet spot above an AoE cap of 1....where everyone can still function perfectly and lag free.
That all depends on the netcode, bandwidth limit, server power (and single target vs AoE bias Meta)....and how many players you want to allow on screen at a time.
ZOS has vastly exceeded this system limit....with the inevitable consequences.
You cant have massive on screen player numbers AND unlimited Caps.
You can have a handful of players with high caps.
You can have loads of player and a really low cap.
You cant have both and expect the system to meet the demand.
Edited by Rune_Relic on December 4, 2015 12:45PMAnything that can be exploited will be exploited0
