Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Poor decision from Devs.... Bye bye population


Recommended Posts

Title says it all... 250 zone cap are you stupid or just a bunch of fustilarians? You cant even get a 200 person siege correct.. Cant release and it looks like im watching a flip book... LOL this company..

Edited by ZaxsTT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ZaxsTT changed the title to Poor decision from Devs.... Bye bye population

The Seige tonight was a poorly made dergs show. Hope it get's better. We had groups of people that could not release and many more that could not queue in...

I mean nothing of this as an excuse or disparage the efforts of the winning side, But server performance here custard sucks. 

PSS... you will not get this kind of load test on "kill the devs on test".

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Armegeddon said:

The Seige tonight was a poorly made dergs show. Hope it get's better. We had groups of people that could not release and many more that could not queue in...

I mean nothing of this as an excuse or disparage the efforts of the winning side, But server performance here custard sucks. 

PSS... you will not get this kind of load test on "kill the devs on test".

 

It was much more active and more players which is essential for CF. Read my feedback on like & dislike about CF - it will improve the whole game by a lot. 

MQfHl7c.png

Crowfall Game Client: https://www.crowfall.com/en/client/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DAOC had better siege performance. Last night castle siege was a disappointment. It was a slideshow. I really want this game to do well. I love the concept. However queues, dying once without able to release, and poor performance is starting to wear the fun. Kudo's to the attackers that could muster those numbers. For the defenders it wasn't much of a fight or defense. Man we could of used some boiling oil!

 

The Rez mechanic might need to take a look at. I'm not sure what the deal with player resurrection with long cooldowns. It wouldn't have helped anyway last night anyways.

Edited by Mudpuppy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, ZaxsTT said:

Title says it all... 250 zone cap are you stupid or just a bunch of fustilarians? You cant even get a 200 person siege correct.. Cant release and it looks like im watching a flip book... LOL this company..

It is being tested on TEST along with performance improvements.

IhhQKY6.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really think that they should limit alliances to only 3 guilds until this can be fixed and once it is, bump back up to 5. I had a blast when you guys were putting up a defense last night, but after those 2 fights outside the walls it was like no one was there and now I see why. This could have been a more enjoyable experience for both sides if the offense didn't zone cap the defense because they didn't actually have enough players to do so.

Also, props to the guys hold positions in the zone and trying to auction off their players leaving the zone. Natural progression of this silly asz meta of zone capping.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't release on death for over 2 minutes, then can't rez at statue for almost a minute hitting F, slide show all around, lag lag lag, ques.... I do not think I can think of any more possible fail than this. You tout this game as large scale, you gear it for large scale, you make it so small scale cant happen... then your server can not handle the large scale. I said when you announced launch it was going to be interesting to actually watch someone shoot themselves in the foot, I am no longer amused at watching it.This had all the ear marks to be a great night of fighting, but was let down due to poor server performance. And somehow you are going to increase it to 250 and expect that to work, must be one magic wand you all of a sudden found.

 

 

Artboardweps.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It really does seem like the developers are living in some sort of bubble shielded from any sort of reality that the game exists in. There should be an immediate all hands meeting to address the chat and poor performance, after those items have been addressed then mess around with increasing server caps maybe but it seems so far down on the list of priorities it just hurts to see them even discuss it. The game is hardly playable in 40 person battles and that was to increase that number by 210 maybe stick to chat and the memory leaks first.

Edited by Fizbun
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is, optimization being last resolution on the roadmap to launch worked better for more simplistic engines of the old days. New aged games, the optimization of performance should be hashed out well in the pre-alpha phase. There really isn't much they can do to fix the slideshow fps at this point. They keep trying and do gain minimal improvements, but if the game couldn't run well in its barebones state, it won't be much different as a fully complex product. They should re-evaluate the game's concept design and base it around the unity engine and backend netcode limitations that they can't break free from. 

I am quite surprised they don't make a layer grid where players can load into a zone on the fly without loading screens. Games like world of warcraft do this and have 10,000+ players running around the giant continent with no loading screens. They can still have a limit of 200 players per area, but the world would feel more like a world and less like a lobby. I know unreal engine allows for load level transfer borders on the fly without loading screens exceptionally well. I am not sure about unity as I have never programmed with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Fizbun said:

It really does seem like the developers are living in some sort of bubble shielded from any sort of reality that the game exists in. There should be an immediate all hands meeting to address the chat and poor performance, after those items have been addressed then mess around with increasing server caps maybe but it seems so far down on the list of priorities it just hurts to see them even discuss it. The game is hardly playable in 40 person battles and that was to increase that number by 210 maybe stick to chat and the memory leaks first.

This.  I have felt like this now for the past 2 years playing/testing this game.  The UI/mapperformance/FvF map/500 guild cap, ALL of this I thought SHOULD and WOULD be the massive emergency patch incoming.  Nope, they worked on clipping fae wings and doing sin/duelist work.  (scratches head)

The games issue is simple.  Too small of maps, servers cannot hold these 'zerg' battles, and a terrible starting experience for new players.

FIXES???

1. Increase the map size, unlock the timers on keeps forts so they are 24/7.  This will keep smaller wars going on 24/7 and ensure the big 'zerg window' is non-existent PLUS open up some actual playbility for smaller groups/sol/duos to play and have fun.

2. Completely stop messing with classes/races right now; (EXCEPT THE WARDEN HELLLOO????) and FOCUS ON THE UI/MAP/LAG. 

3.  Put an end to this RIDICULOUS guild/alliance size.  invoke friendly fire on ALLIANCE guilds unless grouped.  Will once again, disperse this non-sense guild zerging and allow your new players to actually PLAY and have a good experience coming in.

Wrain

 

Edited by Wrain
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, ZaxsTT said:

Title says it all... 250 zone cap are you stupid or just a bunch of fustilarians? You cant even get a 200 person siege correct.. Cant release and it looks like im watching a flip book... LOL this company..

Yep, large player amounts are currently unplayable, extremely laggy and choppy. More is a great solution to make it even worse.
In addition they crippled the FvF to a bigger Skypoint
In addition they gutted the Fae race from a high mobility race to a double-jump minotaur

I'm not sure if they don't know what they are doing or if they just don't care. It's one of both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mudpuppy said:

DAOC had better siege performance.

Man we could of used some boiling oil!

It boggles my mind that a game claiming to be a Throne War and marketing it's siege is outdone by a ~20 year old game.

Battering rams, oil, wall points to climb up, conquest mechanics tying POI together, choke points, etc.

I get that CF takes inspiration from Shadowbane's also lacking siege model, but at least it had handshake and free building to compensate a bit.

 


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Lirezh said:

I'm not sure if they don't know what they are doing or if they just don't care. It's one of both.

I'm starting to be of the camp that thinks Crowfall is just a tech demo. They're using it to learn what they're doing, but have little interest in making it a playable, polished game. Am I crazy? Or is the world crazy?👽👾👻🧜‍♂️🧞‍♂️🧟‍♀️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Pystkeebler said:

I'm starting to be of the camp that thinks Crowfall is just a tech demo. They're using it to learn what they're doing, but have little interest in making it a playable, polished game. Am I crazy? Or is the world crazy?👽👾👻🧜‍♂️🧞‍♂️🧟‍♀️

Nah it's just that ACE does not seem to have quality control and some devs seem to be kind of in a hurry without love to details.

Usually a software company has quality control staff who check every change and proposed change for outcomes. QA staff would have ripped that Test patch into pieces long before it would have reached a public test server.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Pystkeebler said:

I'm starting to be of the camp that thinks Crowfall is just a tech demo. They're using it to learn what they're doing, but have little interest in making it a playable, polished game. Am I crazy? Or is the world crazy?👽👾👻🧜‍♂️🧞‍♂️🧟‍♀️

I will laugh my ass off when they announce their new project, which is most likely another MMO, and it has the exact same flaws as Crowfall.

IHaKjRO.png

"Crowfall's evolution has been interesting: when we started, the game leaned much more heavily on survival mechanics. over time we added more and more strategy and pulled the survival mechanics. by launch, we'll be the most strategic virtual universe (IMO surpassing Eve Online)" - J. Todd Coleman, January 5th 2020

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fizbun said:

It really does seem like the developers are living in some sort of bubble shielded from any sort of reality that the game exists in. There should be an immediate all hands meeting to address the chat and poor performance, after those items have been addressed then mess around with increasing server caps maybe but it seems so far down on the list of priorities it just hurts to see them even discuss it. The game is hardly playable in 40 person battles and that was to increase that number by 210 maybe stick to chat and the memory leaks first.

You act as if the devs have no idea the performance is bad. They know,  just isn't an easy fix. All you can do is buy more things off the cash shop to sustain development until it gets fixed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Zatch said:

You act as if the devs have no idea the performance is bad. They know,  just isn't an easy fix. All you can do is buy more things off the cash shop to sustain development until it gets fixed. 

It will never be fixed unless they rebuild the game in a new engine or use 2D LoDs for all player models, turn off all spells and just use red circles on the ground like gw2. Dont hold your breath!

Better off just reshaping concept design to fit around what the current game performance is capable of.

Edited by Jubileet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isnt the test happening today trying to improve exactly what yall are complaining about?

Am i missing something?

Edited by BarriaKarl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, BarriaKarl said:

Isnt the test happening today trying to improve exactly what yall are complaining about?

Am i missing something?

No, they are trying to raise the zone caps and they want to see if the servers can handle it. The issue is that the game cannot even handle 40 players in an area at a time there are massive performance issues with the game. I have a 2080 super, i5 and 16 GB RAM and this game chugs along at 30FPS if there are more than 10 players. 40 players and it's the occasional slideshow with 20 FPS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...