GBG: Current state of affairs (a protest...)

[RedR0ck]

This game is unplayable on Thu 8 am! FIX IT INNO! This is piece of junk!

 

[Dominator - X]

not talking about those 4 people
others use som kind of SCRIPT/ BOT to cheat no other way to get 1'000+ fights a day

Typical ignorant commenter:

"I can't do it, therefore they must be cheating".

 

[Angry.Blanket]

Really?!? Because for the full guilds, GE has up to 480 people on each map and it does just fine without being timed. Aren't there 8 guilds at the most on GBG maps? So for most maps it's probably much less than 600 people. I mean, even with 8 guilds the average membership would have to be 75 for there to be 600 people on that map. And that's only if all members of every guild are actively participating. Have just one guild with less than 40 members and you're already under 600 people. I'm actually really curious as to your reasoning behind this statement of yours. I don't see any connection between the number of people on a map and the issue of timing.

GE is 15 minutes per season,

 

[Johnny B. Goode]

That's not the same thing , there isn't and never will be any communication or swapping between guilds therefore no reason to time anything. This is apples to oranges and you know it

See, now you've hit on the pivotal problem with both GBG and GvG...swapping between guilds. I have nothing against guilds making alliances to fight, but alliances just to swap tiles back and forth should never have been possible in the original design of either. And it's such an easy fix to remove the problem. The only reason I can think of for them not having fixed it in either is that they're catering to the paying customers in both cases. Sacrificing game balance for more cash. Which I guess is alright if it keeps the game going, but it makes both of those features pretty much unplayable in any meaningful way for the less-than-Serious players. Which is why I don't waste much energy in either, even on the rare occasions I decide to dabble in one or the other.

 

[RedR0ck]

It lags at the start of GbG and for 20 minutes after. Don't forget this is a simultaneous login by thousands of people and to upgrade their backbone at the cost of many thousands per year for 20 minutes once every two weeks is not going to happen,

It is called scalability. Nowadays any cloud infrastructure offers this capacity. It won't cost "thousands".

 

[Be Chuille]

GBG in its current state is impracticable for guilds that are active yet are not in the top 10. Active guilds do well and the reward is sitting out many seasons, stuck on the map with two powerful guilds that run the map.

This is NOT fun.

It is ridiculous that guilds need to intentionally slow down and not do well to try to stay out of that situation. When you are in lower diamond, it is often impossible to stay out of 1K, because all of the guilds on the map are also trying to not finish in the top few. So unless you do nothing, it is too easy to "win". And winning is losing in this case, which is absurd. There is absolutely no incentive to do well in GBG.

 

[Ebeondi Asi]

It is called scalability. Nowadays any cloud infrastructure offers this capacity. It won't cost "thousands".

Of course! all companies get all the storage space in the 'cloud' they want for free! totally free. Like the Easter Bunny pays for it?
I do agree it would not cost Inno "thousands" more like "hundreds of thousands" (per year) LOL

 

[xivarmy]

It is called scalability. Nowadays any cloud infrastructure offers this capacity. It won't cost "thousands".

FoE may be too old to properly take advantage of cloud infrastructure. i.e. when it was first developed (beta release 11 years ago - and likely based on their even older previous games, reusing the backend for a Flash-based web-game (wow have things changed in 10 years)) it was not uncommon to run something off "dedicated servers", not distributed scalable instances - and it's a lot of work to rewrite a backend to take advantage of new technology.

Indications of the poor state of their back-end have come up from their non-implementation of GvG onto phones (stating it as "impossible" at some point).

And from when they released GBG a statement that said they *really* wanted it to be cross-server (which would open up so many possibilities to solve the problems with it by giving a larger pool of the strongest guilds and being able to find real matches for them rather than just rotate out who gets the beating this season) but their server architecture just couldn't handle it.

So while server cost wise it may even be *more* efficient if they could use cloud architecture, development wise it's probably just not practical.

 

[RedR0ck]

FoE may be too old to properly take advantage of cloud infrastructure. i.e. when it was first developed (beta release 11 years ago - and likely based on their even older previous games, reusing the backend for a Flash-based web-game (wow have things changed in 10 years)) it was not uncommon to run something off "dedicated servers", not distributed scalable instances - and it's a lot of work to rewrite a backend to take advantage of new technology.

Indications of the poor state of their back-end have come up from their non-implementation of GvG onto phones (stating it as "impossible" at some point).

And from when they released GBG a statement that said they *really* wanted it to be cross-server (which would open up so many possibilities to solve the problems with it by giving a larger pool of the strongest guilds and being able to find real matches for them rather than just rotate out who gets the beating this season) but their server architecture just couldn't handle it.

So while server cost wise it may even be *more* efficient if they could use cloud architecture, development wise it's probably just not practical.

This is at least make sense. In the ideal world the company would want to invest in cloud considering they are making profit from the game but I presume that's not about Inno.

 

[RedR0ck]

Of course! all companies get all the storage space in the 'cloud' they want for free! totally free. Like the Easter Bunny pays for it?
I do agree it would not cost Inno "thousands" more like "hundreds of thousands" (per year) LOL

They don't need to keep it "ON" for the whole time. Just need to implement it automatically twice per month for 30 min that's it. This is not thousands but it might cost them to migrate to the cloud. I didn't know that they are still on-site.