(02-17-2015, 03:06 PM)Kage Wrote: Instead of the random many Chaired players all about the world we're going to see them all chaired next to aetherytes, NPCs, or can't see them cause they're in the Inn.

Then they might be stuck in crafts all over the world. With a chair next to their name with their tools out at 10/80 progress on their craft.

(02-16-2015, 09:45 PM)Unnamed Mercenary Wrote:

(02-16-2015, 09:24 PM)QueenFrejyalen Wrote:

(02-16-2015, 08:53 PM)Kellach Woods Wrote: I'm not super familiar with server structures beyond what I've gleamed playing MMOs and through my job, but it really feels it's less of a problem with the server than a design decision when it comes to the lock.

Is there any difference between creating a character and logging on one? There shouldn't be that much of a difference.

Hmm yeah if there were a different between logged in characters and ones that were simply created, that could be a better use of the server restriction.

I think some more people were talking about that above and I agree with that idea.

I think part of the issue with that is that characters are created locally on the machine first. THat's why we can save appearance data and then select a server. SE would need to factor that in, which would require a recode of the lobby server. (maybe for the better?)

It should be noted, there have been times when a map has been so congested, new people cannot enter it. Most recently, Mor Dhona when 2.5 hit. So we definitely can have map-wide congestion problems. I don't know much about how the underlying architecture of the servers was designed, but assuming we can't instance each zone to multiple servers, we'll keep running into this as an issue as time progresses. Who knows if say, Northern Shroud and East Thanalan are on the same server or not?  The only possible fix I could see would be to try to separate each zone to a different server, but that wouldn't really work either because a given zone's population could spike. It wouldn't be a proper use of resources. Especially if we assume more fights like Behemoth or Odin could happen. 

I am assuming that we'll be getting a server overhaul when 3.0 launches, however. First, because the EU datacenter. Second, for all those new maps. I'd say a large population of the PVE-only players will likely AFK there, reducing load on our main cities and surrounding area. And, assuming the 3.0 content is indeed housed on different servers, that should increase the server capacity for new characters. Maybe.

(02-17-2015, 03:21 PM)Kage Wrote: I only have ideas based on what I've seen the servers/worlds operate. Since we don't know concretely the percentages of the population (who's online, what is online), it's harder to know what truly locks it down.

For all I know, RMT sees Balmung as the big thing to sell gil in. And yet, I only get about 3 tells a week from RMTers. That's a big difference from the beginning of the game when I got like 20 a day. Why did they stop advertising as much? Is there less activity here? other worlds get -much- more RMT tell activity and their bot pics are -much- much more obvious (not that it isn't in Balmung but they always have loads more than what I experience in open world Balmung).

(02-17-2015, 03:26 PM)QueenFrejyalen Wrote:

(02-17-2015, 03:21 PM)Kage Wrote: I only have ideas based on what I've seen the servers/worlds operate. Since we don't know concretely the percentages of the population (who's online, what is online), it's harder to know what truly locks it down.

For all I know, RMT sees Balmung as the big thing to sell gil in. And yet, I only get about 3 tells a week from RMTers. That's a big difference from the beginning of the game when I got like 20 a day. Why did they stop advertising as much? Is there less activity here? other worlds get -much- more RMT tell activity and their bot pics are -much- much more obvious (not that it isn't in Balmung but they always have loads more than what I experience in open world Balmung).

I can attest that the RMT activity on the lower-population servers is much, MUCH worst than on Balmung.  I'm not kidding.

On Lamia server I used to get at least 15 tells a day, depending on how often I went into a new zone that number could double.  I had to keep emptying my blacklist of names that were NOT being removed from the game just to make room for the newer, more persistent ones.  Do not attempt the suffering of the low populace servers because it almost feels as if SE is completely ignoring their cries for help.

But yes, I think that if we could at least know what affected the servers (as you say, who/what is online?) then maybe we could determine how to fix the issue..

(02-17-2015, 03:32 PM)Kage Wrote:

(02-17-2015, 03:26 PM)QueenFrejyalen Wrote:

(02-17-2015, 03:21 PM)Kage Wrote: I only have ideas based on what I've seen the servers/worlds operate. Since we don't know concretely the percentages of the population (who's online, what is online), it's harder to know what truly locks it down.

For all I know, RMT sees Balmung as the big thing to sell gil in. And yet, I only get about 3 tells a week from RMTers. That's a big difference from the beginning of the game when I got like 20 a day. Why did they stop advertising as much? Is there less activity here? other worlds get -much- more RMT tell activity and their bot pics are -much- much more obvious (not that it isn't in Balmung but they always have loads more than what I experience in open world Balmung).

I can attest that the RMT activity on the lower-population servers is much, MUCH worst than on Balmung.  I'm not kidding.

On Lamia server I used to get at least 15 tells a day, depending on how often I went into a new zone that number could double.  I had to keep emptying my blacklist of names that were NOT being removed from the game just to make room for the newer, more persistent ones.  Do not attempt the suffering of the low populace servers because it almost feels as if SE is completely ignoring their cries for help.

But yes, I think that if we could at least know what affected the servers (as you say, who/what is online?) then maybe we could determine how to fix the issue..

yes which makes me think that it is -possible- (though not probable) that other servers have a higher bot population though they have a smaller real player population. Possible though not probable that they have the same population all together but then why no character creation issues there?

But the thing is... if you get rid of the bots (which maybe we have a lower percentage of but higher population of real players) and it fills with real players...  what then? What happens when we are at 100% capacity of real players (ideal perfect vacuum situation)? How about, even 90% real since we can't get rid of bots all together. When that population of real players, active players, fills up and are playing?

What if we're just hitting the capacity that the world can start to take?

AFK kick won't solve that. Removing bots won't solve it. They're only small bandaids.

At this point I think more infrastructure work is needed on the server side / SE side.

(02-17-2015, 03:13 PM)QueenFrejyalen Wrote: All very interesting points, I did not know that the 3.0 content was to be housed on a different server!  =Oc  And I can definitely see where the new maps will be the new place to commune for higher players, thus freeing up the other areas.  But yeah, putting everything on separate servers sounds both tough and like it would be negated by specific cities/areas being more heavily populated.

Maybe I see a lot more congestion than others because of still being on ps3 (I know, I know...please don't say anything ;^; ) but what about for PC players?  Have any of you really experienced much lag or been barred from entering an area that was too congested?  Do you have issues when you try to contact a retainer from the bells in Mor Dhona?  I've had the system cancel out on me because there's just too many people there.  XD

I guess what I'm asking is, how bad is the server lag for other players?  For me, it can be pretty bad.  I plan to switch to ps4 OR PC (when my tax returns come in) and it'd be nice to know if there's a better world out there, so to speak.  xD

(02-17-2015, 03:21 PM)Kage Wrote: I only have ideas based on what I've seen the servers/worlds operate. Since we don't know concretely the percentages of the population (who's online, what is online), it's harder to know what truly locks it down. Right now? Concurrent logged in people seems to be the forerunner considering that maintenance has a time when people squeeze through

(02-17-2015, 03:49 PM)Kellach Woods Wrote: If this is the limit of people that can get on a server, SE has probably the worst MMO service I've ever seen.

Their infrastructure seems weird and outright disingenuous.

(02-17-2015, 03:13 PM)QueenFrejyalen Wrote: Maybe I see a lot more congestion than others because of still being on ps3 (I know, I know...please don't say anything ;^; ) but what about for PC players?  Have any of you really experienced much lag or been barred from entering an area that was too congested?  Do you have issues when you try to contact a retainer from the bells in Mor Dhona?  I've had the system cancel out on me because there's just too many people there.  XD

I guess what I'm asking is, how bad is the server lag for other players?  For me, it can be pretty bad.  I plan to switch to ps4 OR PC (when my tax returns come in) and it'd be nice to know if there's a better world out there, so to speak.  xD

(02-17-2015, 03:44 PM)Unnamed Mercenary Wrote: It's only speculation on my part. But from what I know about servers from a little bit of computer science, they should be load-balanced and mirrored, or we'd be having WAY more issues. Our best bet would be for SE to try doing more dynamic resource allocation, like the instance servers, but for the more heavily populated maps. It's a very tricky thing to talk about because we don't have the server details and we don't know the underlying architecture. ...but assuming certain maps have crashed in the past, (like the 2.0 launch), it stands to reason that maps (or some maps) might be separated by server. In that event, SE could try to alleviate some of the congestion issues by mirroring highly populated maps. Like....let's say there were two instances of Ul'dah, channel1 and channel2. If channel1 is under high load, future map changes might try to move a player to channel2. This works GREAT in theory, because there would be less characters to render, but it would be devastating to parties and RP. People would have to manually change over if needed, and it could be abused for FATE grinding, etc. (If anyone played Aion, this should sound familiar).

(02-17-2015, 03:56 PM)Unnamed Mercenary Wrote: Probably so! ...but we keep coming back >_> <_<

Not to beat a dead horse even more, but FFXI got criticized for a lot of weird and bizarre stuff too. And people are still playing that game as well. On PS2s. and it hurts thinking that someone is still using a PS2 to play an online game. Even if it's JP-only now.

(02-17-2015, 04:03 PM)Kellach Woods Wrote: like there's either more people on Balmung than ever before,