Game + Lag

[Nickwahh5]

Warhammer Online has been home for very large scale battles, and I invited my friends (over 10 of them) to play this weekend. Due to lags, they all left. For as long as I can remember, there has beenlag when we get x2 weekends or pop over 750+.

I totally get the game engine is one of the worst in MMO history, and that the servers are ran on a free no-payment model for us players. I'm just asking what can be done about the lags?

Can we perhaps donate for better servers? Or push back development for future content & focus on improving the engine? I just want to have a healthy discussion on why this happens, and how we can fix it?

[Manatikik]

Easiest way is to split up between the three active zones. When you aren’t in the main zone you very rarely get lag spike.

This is easier said than done, however, because 1) the zerging force will get easier rewards from keep flip + zone flip 2) the only way to get meaningful progression (outside of a good organized group funneling medallions) is to be as active and in a zone for longer stretches of time (doubly so when it’s a pre-fort zone and people want reservations) 3) if you can convince part of your realm to split off and go to an empty/less populated zone to escape the lag you end up with no opposition so you are PvDoor and you get nothing from the flips due to no resistance and 4) the players who aren’t just looking for the path of least resistance to rr and gear need to go where players are which is the main zone.

[bichka]

original warhammer online had different servers to handle:
- scenarios
- each tier for t1-t3
- each pairing for t4
- probably city siege
maybe some for pve
thats why crashing of pairing or even lowbie tier doesn't affects anything else
and thats why different pairings/lowbie tiers don't share their lags.

this server running by entuasists, not by huge company with lot of $
and it's 1 server for anything

they don't accept donations cos it's turn unvanted attention from EA/Workshop/whatever.

[Tom]

Maybe an automatic opening of more t4 zones over a certain population size? Now there are two t4 zones at the same time but that is the first time all day. The t2 zones sat idle except for the odd roamer but roaming wont progress zones to a higher tier.

[chazwozza]

With forts now implemented people are unwilling to go to other zones for fear of losing a potential reserved spot

[Gangan]

Maybe an automatic opening of more t4 zones over a certain population size? Now there are two t4 zones at the same time but that is the first time all day. The t2 zones sat idle except for the odd roamer but roaming wont progress zones to a higher tier.

The number of open zones already depends on the number of players online. But to get more open t4-zones, you have to push the campaigns from t2 ^^

Eventhough this won't help much, as people prefer to be in one crowded zone instead of splitting up and starting a new fight elsewhere.
The reduced rr-gain due to the AAO adds probably additional obstacles to this.

[Charon]

RoR team pls start selling t-shirts, cups, etc... its right time to help you get better hardware

[Armoz]

RoR team pls start selling t-shirts, cups, etc... its right time to help you get better hardware

They are not allowed to make any profit.

[HelgardZA]

Perhaps a system similar to AAO can help here?

For instance, a buff called 'Strategic Role' or 'War on Two Fronts', which benefits the players in the off-zone with increased RR, or Medallions. If it could be a buff specific to lower RR players, it may create a separately tiered zone where players of lower RRs and gear sets can actually be viable. The higher RR players will be gunning for Forts, and the regular incentives for main zone play will still apply, so I doubt that it would actually drain the main zone of all its players. The main zone keeps and Lords could be buffed and debuffed based on the status of the other zone, perhaps, for fluff and/or actual strategic reasons.

What do you think?

[Alfa1986]

Yes, yesterday there were epic lags in Caledor. I can not say that there were so many players, 150 * 150. if it were 300 * 300 this could be connected with the overpopulation of the server, but 150 * 150 is the usual online in game. I would not call the limit of 100 players the right decision, then massive battles will be lost. It may be worthwhile to think about the idea of ​​letting a limited number of players enter the keep zone, as was done at the forts.