Teleporting / Rollbacks, an explanation


Pathfinder Online

51 to 100 of 110 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Goblin Squad Member

Audoucet wrote:

First, paying in advance isn't "not paying". It's, well... Paying in advance.

Secondly, not everyone got in the KS.

I am amazed to see how many people are ready to pay for nothing, waiting for nothing, happy with what they get, whatever it is.

That is very very bad news for the future of videogames.

It is unknown how many. Not every kick starter backer will start with EE. Just as, not every alpha invite was actually used, and sine that were were used very briefly. Even if kick starter backers do start with day one of EE, how many will resub when their prepaid time expires?

When the paid time starts, major bugs will not be received well and may very well drive potential players away permanently. They are not going to listen to "this is still beta" or "we told you this is MVP". They will say, "I'm not paying for this buggy
crap."

As I have said numerous times, MVP is not what GW wants it to be, it is what the consumer is willing to pay for.

Goblin Squad Member

Caldeathe Baequiannia wrote:
Audoucet wrote:
I am amazed to see how many people are ready to pay for nothing

We're paying for experience. The first month of EE will get me the same amount of experience as the last month. The xp I pay for in Month one won't be gone six months later, and I'll have accumulated some influence so that my friends and I can do some stuff.

I've mentioned it before that I feel like a lot of gamers have an inflated sense of what they should get for their money. Outside of internet delivered content, there is almost no entertainment industry on earth where the customer imagines they deserve so much for $15.00. A couple of movies (Maybe one if it's AVX). One or two books. A few drinks. An afternoon at the museum. It certainly won't get you in to see a decent fair, let alone an amusement park or a live play.

If I can amuse myself for two hours a month, that's acceptable value for my $15. Any time on top of that is bonus. So far, I'm not finding it hard to get two hours a month of entertainment out of the alpha.

I think you miss something... a lot of people do this...

I can pay $60 for a massive budget game and get more than 4 months of fun from it. I am looking for a persistent multiplayer game though... So I am willing to pay more than $60, and a monthly fee is fine.

It is not fine if I lose everything I work for because the server cannot handle the load. If I lose it because someone else takes it, Thats fine too.

Goblin Squad Member

I would agree with Cheatle and Caldeathe on a potential solution but it would also require VERY careful balancing in the long term. In the short term removing JUST enough to ensure server stability at present while buffing critters that remained to maintain similar difficulty might work. My biggest concern is that without movement of the critters static formations become even easier to ignore if you let escalations build up. We will also at some point be getting even MORE NPCs when the guards who are supposed to patrol the roads are added to the game. So while we are at it lets ask for mob pathing, actively reinforcing each other when nearby groups come under attack, smart AI ie focus fire on ONE character. That's probably all in the works. In the meantime maybe we should let the devs build the game without clamoring over EVERY little thing we want NOW.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.

It seems to me more useful right now in Alpha to actually beef up the Escalations in order to trigger the server overloads that cause problems so they can be studied and corrected.

Goblin Squad Member

I have to agree with Bluddwolf. If (as Ryan wrote) the escalation mobs are a serious drain on resources, cut them back. I feel like the escalation system was designed in anticipation of a larger population of players than we are seeing so far. In fact they may be too fast growing and numerous than will be fun in EE, already.

Goblin Squad Member

Caldeathe Baequiannia wrote:
We're paying for experience. The first month of EE will get me the same amount of experience as the last month. The xp I pay for in Month one won't be gone six months later, and I'll have accumulated some influence so that my friends and I can do some stuff.

Probably the most critical piece of this bug moving into EE--I've seen players reporting they used XP for a feat, got de-synched, then upon returning no longer have either the feat or the XP. That's the most serious issue in this to me, as it directly impacts the one thing folks did pay for. I can teleport across the map and walk back (annoying). I can loose some equipment and remake it (very annoying). I can't regain XP if it's spent then the feat disappears.

And I concur on cutting back the escalations. At this point they are so high I believe most players are just avoiding large sections of the map. Which is probably focusing them in a few hexes, and thus a few servers, thus amplifying the server load problems in the areas with players.

EDIT: Just confirmed this on my front. Logged out at Phaeros last night, after training up at KP and fighting (and losing) lots of battles. Relog this morning put me up near Golgotha. All my equipment is back like I did nothing yesterday, all the feats are gone, and so is the XP. I'm now at roughly 10% of the XP I had before purchasing those feats, looks like basically what I would have gained since I logged out last night. Is the XP tracked in some system separate from the rest of the character stats that would cause them to not be reset along with everything else?

Goblin Squad Member

Xeen wrote:
Caldeathe Baequiannia wrote:
Audoucet wrote:
I am amazed to see how many people are ready to pay for nothing

We're paying for experience. The first month of EE will get me the same amount of experience as the last month. The xp I pay for in Month one won't be gone six months later, and I'll have accumulated some influence so that my friends and I can do some stuff.

I've mentioned it before that I feel like a lot of gamers have an inflated sense of what they should get for their money. Outside of internet delivered content, there is almost no entertainment industry on earth where the customer imagines they deserve so much for $15.00. A couple of movies (Maybe one if it's AVX). One or two books. A few drinks. An afternoon at the museum. It certainly won't get you in to see a decent fair, let alone an amusement park or a live play.

If I can amuse myself for two hours a month, that's acceptable value for my $15. Any time on top of that is bonus. So far, I'm not finding it hard to get two hours a month of entertainment out of the alpha.

I think you miss something... a lot of people do this...

I can pay $60 for a massive budget game and get more than 4 months of fun from it. I am looking for a persistent multiplayer game though... So I am willing to pay more than $60, and a monthly fee is fine.

It is not fine if I lose everything I work for because the server cannot handle the load. If I lose it because someone else takes it, Thats fine too.

I don't think I've missed much on this, I just don't agree with how some people view what we're paying for. I can also get hundreds of hours of entertainment out of a dollar pack of cards and some rolls of pennies. The difference is that I'm not paying anyone there for original content.

I'm with you in that I don't think that they can get by without making sure the egregious bugs are fixed. I better not lose XP, and I better not lose anything that I can't recover without investing extra time. (Losing my trained feats as fine as long as I can retrain them without a great effort. Losing achievements, crafted goods, or components is not acceptable once I'm paying) I'm not with those who insist that there needs to be more content or that the content needs to be adapted to fit what they want before the game can go live.

Goblin Squad Member

Forget the escalation issue for a minute.

Why are we being teleported in the first place?

Why was this option even considered acceptable to begin with?

If a server cannot handle a character then why is it 'passing the buck'?

What exactly was the plan for when too many players overload the system? Don't other MMOs have a queue management system? Does GW plan to install something similar to prevent client/server desyncs in the first place? Why is the system accepting players after a server knows it can't handle them and passes them off? Why was this passing off system even put into place to begin with?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

At the risk of sounding blunt, please don't be offended, but unless you are a developer working on PFO, I don't really think you need answers to those kinds of questions. They're highly technical, and likely driven by technical concerns and limitations, and some product producer or manager is going to need to be briefed on.

This isn't GitHub where people discuss methods for implementing necessary fixes for a piece of code. I think Ryan is just providing some insight into whats happening so people have context, and to reiterate that the problem is being looked at and will be fixed.

Overall, I think this is an example of why sometimes a great deal of transparency just creates more anxiety and questions among the player base.

Goblin Squad Member

I agree 100% Doc, we are having issues the devs have noted them, identified causes and are working on solutions. We might want to give them the opportunity to fix things before grabbing a sledgehammer and beating on the panic button.

Goblin Squad Member

Doc || Allegiant Gemstone Co. wrote:
I don't really think you need answers to those kinds of questions. They're highly technical, and likely driven by technical concerns and limitations, and some product producer or manager is going to need to be briefed on.

I disagree. This treatment is depriving me from satisfying multiple levels on my Maslow hierarchy of needs.

The information given in the OP is a slightly technical response to non technical player experiences. My self-esteem, confidence, sense of achievement and respect for my time would benefit from some form of followup discussion. They opened the discussion with technical issues, so Doc why not followup with technical questions?

Servers don't trust clients. Great, kick them out then. Why not? And why not put in a queue system too? Stop throwing players all over the map without any errors or feedback. Stop allowing me to play only to discover my actions were not recorded by the system.

As a player do you really prefer this system over a more traditional queue?

If a queue system is under development then great. I hope that nobody, including Goblinworks, believes that it's ok to let players move to another hex where their actions might be erased. Please stop this madness!

My paranoid mind is starting to believe we're being redistributed throughout the map intentionally. If this is going to become a normal, no bug report necessary, system is working as intended expectation among players then please let us know now.

Goblin Squad Member

Takasi wrote:
If this is going to become a normal, no bug report necessary, system is working as intended expectation among players then please let us know now.

This is a known aspect of the current system working as (currently) expected. No bug reports related to this group of symptoms is required. Alpha-testers who find this distressing to their psychological well-being should not log in until the next update from the devs to indicate a change in state.

end-semi-humorous-message-from-non-developer

Goblin Squad Member

Takasi wrote:

Forget the escalation issue for a minute.

Why are we being teleported in the first place?

Why was this option even considered acceptable to begin with?

If a server cannot handle a character then why is it 'passing the buck'?

What exactly was the plan for when too many players overload the system? Don't other MMOs have a queue management system? Does GW plan to install something similar to prevent client/server desyncs in the first place? Why is the system accepting players after a server knows it can't handle them and passes them off? Why was this passing off system even put into place to begin with?

I dont think the system was put in place. I think it is just happening. That is part of coding.

A queue system works for most other MMO's but not this type of MMO. They may as well just shut the server off if they do that.

I have no doubt that this issue will be resolved. It just needs to be before EE.

Goblin Squad Member

Xeen wrote:
A queue system works for most other MMO's but not this type of MMO. They may as well just shut the server off if they do that.

Why?

Sorry for the trick question everyone.

The current system IS a queue system.

Log out, wait and log back in.

There just isn't a UI, and sometimes you do get to log back in but guess what SIKE! You weren't really playing!

Stop siking us out. Add a better 'sorry folks our server is too busy for you' method, please.

Goblin Squad Member

Takasi wrote:
If this is going to become a normal, no bug report necessary, system is working as intended expectation among players then please let us know now.

Since the initial post says just the opposite of that, it's unlikely to happen. If you don't like these sort of problems then I would suggest alpha testing is not for you. It might possibly be that early enrolment is also not for you. They will be implementing new features frequently and there are bound to be bugs and unforeseen effects.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Takasi wrote:
Xeen wrote:
A queue system works for most other MMO's but not this type of MMO. They may as well just shut the server off if they do that.

Why?

Sorry for the trick question everyone.

The current system IS a queue system.

Log out, wait and log back in.

There just isn't a UI, and sometimes you do get to log back in but guess what SIKE! You weren't really playing!

Stop siking us out. Add a better 'sorry folks our server is too busy for you' method, please.

Because it is a persistent single server game. If your enemies can get a large army logged in, and most of your group are stuck in a queue... Then you lose your settlement and have no ability to defend it. That is not something people playing this type of game will stand for.

Goblin Squad Member

<Kabal> Kradlum wrote:


Since the initial post says just the opposite of that, it's unlikely to happen. If you don't like these sort of problems then I would suggest alpha testing is not for you. It might possibly be that early enrolment is also not for you. They will be implementing new features frequently and there are bound to be bugs and unforeseen effects.

So do you prefer being passed to another server over being booted out of the system?

I very much want to play an improved game. Maybe, if you don't mind the bugs, that I would suggest that improvement discussions just aren't for you.

Goblin Squad Member

Xeen wrote:
Because it is a persistent single server game. If your enemies can get a large army logged in, and most of your group are stuck in a queue... Then you lose your settlement and have no ability to defend it. That is not something people playing this type of game will stand for.

That is exactly what is happening now.

I am teleported halfway across the map while my group is trying to capture a tower. I have no idea if my actions are being saved or not.

How is that an improvement over waiting in a queue for when the server is capable of handling your character?

CEO, Goblinworks

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's not clear to me if the escalations are actually having any meaningful impact on server load. The server is pretty smart about spawning and despawning mobs when nobody can see them and they're not interacting with anyone. When a mob isn't moving, it doesn't put much load on the server. This isn't my bag and I'm pretty much just speculating so it's very possible I'm wrong but that would be something I'm certain the programmers have considered.

CEO, Goblinworks

@Takasi - totally legit question re: why the server handoff.

Answer is: A login queue was not prioritized ahead of other features. It's relatively easy to attempt a server handoff, and relatively hard to build a login queue.

Our initial server tests indicated that we probably would not need one based on the kind of population we're expecting. We know we have room to improve towards that theoretical max population and that would address the issue without the need for a queue (in the short term).

We're talking about reprioritizing login queues now as a stopgap as we try to evaluate why the servers are being overloaded under current conditions.

Goblin Squad Member

Ryan Dancey wrote:
We're talking about reprioritizing login queues now as a stopgap as we try to evaluate why the servers are being overloaded under current conditions.

Thanks Ryan for a great answer.

I am totally cool with waiting (even for extended periods of time) in a login queue to play this game, for what my singular humble alpha/EE gamer opinion is worth.

Goblin Squad Member

Takasi wrote:
So do you prefer being passed to another server over being booted out of the system?

If the other server was capable of handing the character meaningfully, it would be the ideal. When there are thousands of players interacting, multiple servers may have to share the load for a given hex. At that point, it will be essential for servers to pass the character off when they are over-loaded. Nobody prefers it the way it is, and it isn't the intent. It's just what's happening at the moment. They're working on it.

Goblin Squad Member

Takasi wrote:
Xeen wrote:
Because it is a persistent single server game. If your enemies can get a large army logged in, and most of your group are stuck in a queue... Then you lose your settlement and have no ability to defend it. That is not something people playing this type of game will stand for.

That is exactly what is happening now.

I am teleported halfway across the map while my group is trying to capture a tower. I have no idea if my actions are being saved or not.

How is that an improvement over waiting in a queue for when the server is capable of handling your character?

I am saying that neither is acceptable.

Goblin Squad Member

Caldeathe Baequiannia wrote:
Takasi wrote:
So do you prefer being passed to another server over being booted out of the system?
If the other server was capable of handing the character meaningfully, it would be the ideal. When there are thousands of players interacting, multiple servers may have to share the load for a given hex. At that point, it will be essential for servers to pass the character off when they are over-loaded. Nobody prefers it the way it is, and it isn't the intent. It's just what's happening at the moment. They're working on it.

OK I should have been more specific.

Do you prefer being passed to another server that doesn't manage your location, sends you to that server's location and possibly does not record your progress?

Do you prefer this over sitting in a login queue?

That's the question. How it works on the back end doesn't really matter to me. As a player being slingshotted and unknowingly playing without making any progress is worse than sitting in a login queue, from an end user player perspective.

Goblin Squad Member

Takasi wrote:
<Kabal> Kradlum wrote:


Since the initial post says just the opposite of that, it's unlikely to happen. If you don't like these sort of problems then I would suggest alpha testing is not for you. It might possibly be that early enrolment is also not for you. They will be implementing new features frequently and there are bound to be bugs and unforeseen effects.

So do you prefer being passed to another server over being booted out of the system?

I very much want to play an improved game. Maybe, if you don't mind the bugs, that I would suggest that improvement discussions just aren't for you.

They just asked that you don't keep reporting this bug. They know about it, they are trying to fix it, you don't need to keep reporting it. It's part of stress testing. They will rejig the server configuration and it will get fixed. Implementing a whole new system that just disguises the problem by making people queue is not improving anything.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Caldeathe Baequiannia wrote:
Audoucet wrote:

First, paying in advance isn't "not paying". It's, well... Paying in advance.

Secondly, not everyone got in the KS.

Your second point has some validity, but the first has none. Kickstarter funds are not a purchase. They are a donation toward helping someone acheive something, in return for which, they offer a reward. Add-ons are different. They are a commitment in exchange for a specific thing, and can be construed as a purchase.

All of which aside. No one is telling anyone that they have to use their free months (or any other months) to play in EE. Everyone is perfectly welcome to hold back on playing until they feel the game is ready. Until the time comes when GW tells us that we must use our free time tokens now, no one has any claim on not receiving value for their money.

KS IS a purchase, when there is material rewards for backers. Everything writen is a contract, so when they say "you will get 4 months of game time if the game goes live, if you give 10 more euros". If they didn't send the rewards like minifigures or the bag, people can complain.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

TEO Malvius012 wrote:
Thanks for that Nihimon, I must have missed that transition, but that means there should be plenty of opportunity to tweak systems. And Audoucet we get it, you spent money without knowing what you were spending on. We were not 'paying in advance' we were using our dollars to support the development of a game we thought we might want to play for which we received perks further on in the development process. Your attempts at being in activist investor would be comical if you were not so busy causing strife with every post.

I wonder what the forum would look like, if Ryan announced that Destiny Twin are canceled. It would be interesting.

Goblin Squad Member

<Kabal> Kradlum wrote:
They just asked that you don't keep reporting this bug. They know about it, they are trying to fix it, you don't need to keep reporting it. It's part of stress testing. They will rejig the server configuration and it will get fixed. Implementing a whole new system that just disguises the problem by making people queue is not improving anything.

This is more than a bug if it is a design that, like you said, requires 'rejigging the server configuration'.

From the user perspective do you prefer being able to play even though you're disconnected, or would you rather have an immediate disconnect?

If you login and it turns out that you're not on the right 'server' or whatever and your progress is not being recorded, do you honestly prefer this over waiting in a queue?

As Ryan said a queue system is on the table. Whether it's more or less work or whatever is not my point. I'm asking what you, as a player, prefer. For me I'd rather sit in a login queue than play with a desynched character.

If you do prefer playing with a desynched chracter what is the enjoyment you get? Maybe if I understood I could see the value.

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:
It seems to me more useful right now in Alpha to actually beef up the Escalations in order to trigger the server overloads that cause problems so they can be studied and corrected.

That is exactly what I wss thinking. Turn it up to 11!! It is Alpha afterall.

Goblin Squad Member

It doesn't sound like escalations without involved players actually increase server load (which makes sense--no players should equal the server not spending resources on those areas). Rather, the 100% escalations all over the map seem to be forcing the few players that are on to avoid those areas, and thus concentrate the players in smaller areas. This in turn increases server load in those hexes. If my admittedly crude assessment is close, then I'm not certain it's a valid test of what should actually occur in EE.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I am also going to side with Audoucet. Goblin Works made commitments to those of us who KickStarted them. In many of the ways that matter we are their publishers and they need to deliver the product they pitched us. We aren't at that point of dispute, yet. So lets not go down the path of "they don't owe you, yes they do" quite yet.

=====

On technical issues. I've noticed that every time I log in recently with "Lokesh Brasten" he's stuck in Thornkeep and based on the description of the issue, desynced.

What would likely be helpful for US testers would be some method of identifying general regions that are controlled by which server.

If Goblin Works wants cogent bug reports out of us we need some additional forms of data on our end. A user facing ID of the Server controlling the Hex we're in, a log or onscreen display of those servers so we can add them to bug reports, a display of the number active players in said "region", and similar things. Help us help you, after all many of us are quite invested already. This thread is a good start.

What troubles me is if getting moved servers is the way load is getting handled, and many people seem to be getting dumped to Thornkeep... that just puts a load in the Thornkeep region at no one can escape from because of a self perpetuating overload.

I would point out that even CCP has to sometimes issue "travel" adversaries for players inside the EVE universe itself to warn player's of exactly the same kinds of congestion and overload. Players will even get booted back or forward, or sideways a system. Granted the server infrastructure for EVE is more or robust and granular so getting booted out of a system is less disruptive, but it still can happen.

=====

Speaking thematically, since every "character" is being supported by Pharasma, it would not be unreasonable to have some form of "souls" count on a "region" (a.k.a server). Pharasma has only so much influence to keep PCs "in the world". When that "influence" is getting over taxed (servers at or beyond safe capacity) it would be helpful to warn players ahead of time. That way they can either disperse and clear out the congestion or navigate around it to their destination.

Pharasma Influence Zones/Regions would allow for some degree of player self-regulation, as well circumnavigation of congested areas. This happens all the time in EVE (especially avoiding the Jita system), the largest functioning example of this kind of all-in-one-clustered-world structure.

Goblin Squad Member

The only problem I have with this description is it happens when I am the only player in the Hex and pretty sure the surrounds are also player free. Certainly not as many as 5 people for sure.

It happens when I log in first time, that was (for example) just this morn at 30 minutes before Maintenance. There certainly weren't players around, then either. Log out in Ozem's, log in at The Emerald Lodge.

It happens when I am working escalations. I try to log and restart often to lessen it. Curioisly, never in the middle of a battle, yet. ;)

Goblin Squad Member

Takasi wrote:
This is more than a bug if it is a design that, like you said, requires 'rejigging the server configuration'.

It is highly unlikely that, on top of everything else they are doing, the GW team have developed their own load-balancing software. For most applications, the whole point of having multiple servers is to balance the load. When one of my users gets handed off to another server due to load, they are hitting exactly the same software, so they never know the difference. Even in an MMORPG, if there is no persistent effect on the world, or interaction between characters, then it doesn't matter which server you are handled by. Because PFO has both of those elements, that default behaviour isn't behaving in a useful fashion. Things need to be reconfigured so that no handoff goes to a server that doesn't have the necessary information to do something with your character that is useful. They're working on it. It's not an insurmountable problem.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

KotC - Erian El'ranelen wrote:
It doesn't sound like escalations without involved players actually increase server load (which makes sense--no players should equal the server not spending resources on those areas). Rather, the 100% escalations all over the map seem to be forcing the few players that are on to avoid those areas, and thus concentrate the players in smaller areas. This in turn increases server load in those hexes. If my admittedly crude assessment is close, then I'm not certain it's a valid test of what should actually occur in EE.

+1 This.

That is a very rational and logical explanation. Although I disagree that we wouldn't see this kind of behavior in EE. We would actually see it more acutely.

100% escalations are darn near impossible to break without a massive commitment from fairly well leveled and geared characters. When EE and the wipe comes that segment of heavy hitting characters will be gone. Escalations will start and grow unchecked, blocking off sections and forcing the lower level characters to cluster in "safer" zones.

Veteran Players will be able to navigate themselves through the escalations to farther regions, but any/many newer players will get get stuck just as they are now.

=====

However without some form of Player Numbers data on our end we can't verify or identify if this kind of player clustering due to 100% Escalations is happening.

In the short to medium term I wounder if it would be possible to impose a Cap on Escalations power. Maybe something proportional due to its distance from its originating "Home" hex.

Goblin Squad Member

Bringslite of Fidelis wrote:

The only problem I have with this description is it happens when I am the only player in the Hex and pretty sure the surrounds are also player free. Certainly not as many as 5 people for sure.

It happens when I log in first time, that was (for example) just this morn at 30 minutes before Maintenance. There certainly weren't players around, then either. Log out in Ozem's, log in at The Emerald Lodge.

It happens when I am working escalations. I try to log and restart often to lessen it. Curioisly, never in the middle of a battle, yet. ;)

I don't have real information, but there's actually no reason to assume that a given server looks after contiguous hexes. It's not at all unlikely (probably smarter, even) that a server looks after 1 hex of Thornkeep plus five random wilderness hexes scattered across the map. In that way, the lightest duty hexes might only each have one server paying attention to them, but the busiest ones might have half a dozen.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Okiii I have missed something but I'm surely not avoid any hexes whatever the escalation value is ... It just is a bit exiting from time to time...

Goblin Squad Member

Takasi wrote:
<Kabal> Kradlum wrote:
They just asked that you don't keep reporting this bug. They know about it, they are trying to fix it, you don't need to keep reporting it. It's part of stress testing. They will rejig the server configuration and it will get fixed. Implementing a whole new system that just disguises the problem by making people queue is not improving anything.

This is more than a bug if it is a design that, like you said, requires 'rejigging the server configuration'.

From the user perspective do you prefer being able to play even though you're disconnected, or would you rather have an immediate disconnect?

If you login and it turns out that you're not on the right 'server' or whatever and your progress is not being recorded, do you honestly prefer this over waiting in a queue?

As Ryan said a queue system is on the table. Whether it's more or less work or whatever is not my point. I'm asking what you, as a player, prefer. For me I'd rather sit in a login queue than play with a desynched character.

If you do prefer playing with a desynched chracter what is the enjoyment you get? Maybe if I understood I could see the value.

This is the stress test. If as part of that stress test I get desynched or teleported then so be it. I'm not playing the game, I'm testing the systems. I've spent XP on lots of things that aren't my role to try them out. I've stood around PvP towers testing the mechanics. I've killed people in my company to test the mechanics. I leave my character logged in over night to add to the stress test. The stress test will continue until this problem is fixed, or they find a work around. They cannot go to EE with this problem.

It's actually worrying that they are looking at implementing a queueing system. That seems to me to say they can't fix the configuration problem. If they have to implement a queueing system they are going to have to implement a system to log people out, because otherwise once someone is logged in they are not going to choose to log out. If they do implement a queueing system and you get into a group and the client crashes (which it does for me about once a night), how long are you going to queue to get back to your group? How long are your group going to wait? Is the queue going to be just for logging in or are you going to have to queue at a hex boundary? Can they even go to an EE of 6,000 users (based on the KS pledges) with a queue system?

Goblin Squad Member

<Kabal> Kradlum wrote:
It's actually worrying that they are looking at implementing a queueing system. That seems to me to say they can't fix the configuration problem.

"Looking at" "As a stopgap"

If they don't look at every reasonable possibility, they aren't doing their job. Let's hope they don't need to implement one, or that if they do, it's short-term. EE isn't here, yet. For now, if waiting in a queue means not wasting time on things that the server is going to toss out later, it's probably an acceptable trade-off.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Oh I know. But if they introduce a queueing system it does nothing to fix the underlying problem, and can introduce problems of its own. It's a small dev team with a small budget, implementing a stop-gap solution takes resources away from both.

Goblin Squad Member

Dorje Sylas wrote:
That is a very rational and logical explanation. Although I disagree that we wouldn't see this kind of behavior in EE. We would actually see it more acutely.

I'm working from the assumption (and we know how those can go...) that EE will see a much larger influx of players than Alpha, as folks that aren't interested in testing may skip Alpha, but want to get in early in EE to start the XP clock ticking. With a higher player volume overall, we should be able to better manage escalations, and so long as the established settlements do that job their surrounding territory at least should stay relatively safe in comparison to the current Alpha state. Keeper's Pass is surrounded by maxed out escalations at this point, such that I can walk up to a group of 4-5 goblins and get it handed to me. In EE I'm still hopeful that we'll have a good portion of the 80+ folks that signed on with the Keepers on board and whopping goblins on a regular basis. Now, if that assumption fails, then it will indeed mean the EE is the same as or worse than Alpha, but it will also mean we've got large-scale failure of settlements.

Goblin Squad Member

KotC - Erian El'ranelen wrote:


I'm working from the assumption (and we know how those can go...) that EE will see a much larger influx of players than Alpha, as folks that aren't interested in testing may skip Alpha, but want to get in early in EE to start the XP clock ticking.

I am not sure you will get a huge influx at EE as the sort of casual player that is not taking advantage of this great chance to experiment and learn what to do before mistakes are permanent is not going to be that active after EE either. They will login for a few hours on the weekend and expect people that were in Alpha to teach them how to play.

There is nothing wrong with being a casual player, most of my EVE corp are miners that login for a few hours and go watch movies checking their character every 10 minutes (though any player organisation does need at least one or two active members to keep things rolling) however that sort of player is not going to increase server load much.

Yes their will be an influx at EE but expect them to mainly be casual weekend warriors. Players like my friend Kaziil who spends 6 or 8 hours a day in game at times are already going to be in Alpha.

Goblin Squad Member

Certainly true, but at least GW is also betting on more folks coming in at EE, so that's part of what's influencing my thinking there. We've got some folks like Kaziil that are talking about coming back to Keeper's Pass after EE starts for a permanent home if the EE participation is higher than Alpha, so we're banking on that as well.

Goblin Squad Member

Cool, had a non roll back that wiped out everything I did yesterday.

Goblin Squad Member

Seems lots of folks had that. Something big happened to the server last night methinks.

Goblin Squad Member

A rollback is only not a rollback if it isn't actually a rollback. This rollback might have been a rollback. Rollback.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kadere wrote:
A rollback is only not a rollback if it isn't actually a rollback. This rollback might have been a rollback. Rollback.

Our chief weapon is surprise, fear of rollbacks and surprise;

ummh ... our two chief weapons are, fear of rollbacks, surprise, and ruthlessly efficient teleports!

Er, among our chief weapons are: fear, surprise, ruthless efficiency, and a near fanatical devotion to Ryan!

Um, I'll come in again...

Goblin Squad Member

But now you're falling through the world, into...

Skyland!

Goblin Squad Member

Yeah, first sign of desynch for me and I walk away from the game for the night. No intention of wasting time trying to get anything done if I desync trying to get out of my own settlements hex.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Neadenil Edam wrote:


Our chief weapon is surprise, fear of rollbacks and surprise;

ummh ... our two chief weapons are, fear of rollbacks, surprise, and ruthlessly efficient teleports!

Er, among our chief weapons are: fear, surprise, ruthless efficiency, and a near fanatical devotion to Ryan!

Um, I'll come in again...

No one expects the Desnan Inquistion!

No seriously, who would expect Desna to have Inquisitors? :-/

51 to 100 of 110 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Licensed Products / Digital Games / Pathfinder Online / Teleporting / Rollbacks, an explanation All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.