DeletedUser
According to a fan data website (that I will not name due to it not being connected to Inno), he/she plays on 10 worlds, but Walrand and Xyr appear to be his/her mains.
-
We are looking for you! Always wanted to join our Supporting Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
Take a look at our recruitement page for more information and how you can apply:
GvG Lag - "tile 38,75"
- Thread starter -Athena-
- Start date
vimesfan
New Member
I have cities on B, F, G, H, N, S, U, W, X, and Y (plus beta). I am very active in GvG on W and X.
So Mr. Longshanks, you nailed it quite nicely.
DeletedUser28037
I play every GvG every night going on two years now. This is the only part of the game that keeps me coming back. The continuous degradation of game performance and errors are quickening their pace. If Inno does not continue to develop and commit resources to reverse this trend I will surely stop playing. I play in US2 and US12 and the issues are the same for both; lag, errors, having to reload the game and navigate back to GvG. It makes no difference what your OS, rendering method or browser is, the performance issues are ever-present. As a devotee to the game of FoE I ask that GvG get some development attention and quickly. There are just hoards of other games fighting for our time and dollars with more coming all the time, so please listen to your community, embrace the suck and commit the needed resources to GvG development.
DeletedUser6219
You can relax. I never said it was an undesirable change, that one, but I will say that it's often over-hyped as a solution to problems, some of which may be clear bugs and not just server stress, and I'll also say the design impacts are frequently minimized in conversations like this one. I'm also not the head of the design team, just a poster here like everyone else, but I know the subject matter. Both the decoupling of tile protections and reset time change have been discussed elsewhere, at length... but its also reasonable to bring decoupling up when putting fixes or change on the table.. I just wish they did not so often dominate the conversation. For example, there are clear behaviors now @ low load and I will make an empirical post on that in a bit. Some mention the "old days of GvG" before the timers were introduced, and many of those voices appear to have at least a reasonable understanding of the issues, imo. You can consider me as neutral and objective as possible as to the fate of GvG, though it's funny meat thought I was Razorback Pirate.
@ longshanks Athena is in my rival guild, but she understands me. I'm not going for ad-hominem there in my comments to you, and I will call out those who use those kinds of distractions to avoid genuine discussion. There's no need to be condescending, as it does not strengthen arguments nor anecdotes, mine included. I was literally trying to help you out, and declared open-hearted intention to do so, because it was clear from what you've written that you lacked GvG experience in either degree or setting which would enable you to process some of the comments and complaints, so my goal was to help bridge the gap. However, I can sometimes be neglectful of social nuance and connotation in dominance hierarchies. I also believe the cup must be empty before it can be filled.
@Razorback Pirate You seem to post very definitively that Inno has made clear what their level of GvG support is, and further the idea that maintaining GvG is in the very least not a priority. Please can you point me to somewhere that this is made clearest and in a most concise way what their position is, so I might educate myself on this, because I'm constantly told that the staff and engineers as well as management have expressed the opposite. Please show me your absolute best steel man case I can point to which shows that complaints are futile so I may distribute this.
As to whether they are withdrawing all the GvG support, I do not know that for a fact. I was speaking almost hypothetically, assuming there was at least some degree of truth in the views expressed here as well as the age of the code, things we might infer such as the AA map's existence, GE's existence, etc.
DeletedUser
The problem is that I don't need to be educated in GvG. I have been in guilds that were heavily in GvG. Just because I don't like to be in that type of guild anymore doesn't mean I don't understand these things. I don't know if you've ever seen the movie "Quigley Down Under", but it's kind of like Tom Selleck's character in that movie. The whole movie he only uses a rifle. Tells anyone who asks that he doesn't like pistols. At the end, he's forced into a gunfight with the villain using pistols. Of course, he wins. And after he shoots the bad guy he says, "Said I didn't have much use for 'em, never said I didn't know how to use 'em."
RazorbackPirate
Well-Known Member
@Warvenya, read my last post. Better yet, re-read all my posts. Slowly and carefully, if needed. You don't seem to understand it. Then, just as I did, go to Facebook, watch the latest live Q&A and form your own opinion. As to mine, do whatever you want with it. Distribute it if you must. I don't care.
Where I'm sure we'll differ, is you seem to feel maintenance into the current system means ongoing financial investments to fix/change/improve the current GvG. The ongoing maintenance I'm talking about is the exact level of maintenance Inno has given actually given GvG the last few years. Port it to HTML 5, bug fix it against new features as needed, but other than that, leave it alone. You - Hope of more investment. Me - More of what they've actually given it. Nothing more, nothing less.
Facts don't care about emotions and the fact is GvG is only available to an ever dwindling percentage of FoE players because of FoE's increasing popularity on Mobile.
The HTML 5 GvG code is brand new, so GvG should be good for a couple years at least. But as we know, it's not the code that's the problem. It's recalc. That's fundamental design architecture and that won't change. That requires too great an investment. So when Inno does decide it's time to make that great an investment into GvG, it will invest to create a brand new GvG, from the ground up, without recalc, for Mobile and PC.
In the meantime, maintenance. No changes. Bug fixes as needed. Everything else, lag included, just the way it is. Maintenance.
Last edited:
DeletedUser6219
I'm dedicating this empirical evidence post to Ms. P and Mr. M.Z. who I was told are monitoring this thread.
Sparta and Foe conducted a very basic test on E server at a calm point or dead zone in the "GvG Boycott". (FE MAP) While no one (or next to no one as there have been occasional breaches) was conducting GvG activity, we took it upon ourselves for the sake of science and getting bugs isolated to choose 4 ppl to place and replace sieges, and 3 to 5 (they had a couple loose cannons join in) on the other side simply killing sieges. No one out our side fought the tile, we all just focused on place and replace of siege.
Here were the results:
No errors (that I'm aware of for the ppl killing the sieges (athena's guild).
One of our siegers (of the 4) turns out did not know what to look for, but the other 3 out of 3 on our side did and encountered the classic behaviors posted in athena's list I have referenced here in this thread. Grey arrows, sticky tile(what that means is the siege shows as still up when its been killed and you cannot replace it - this on the order of seconds, but sometimes hangs indefintely, unable to place the siege and must exit the map and re-enter to do so, hung siege), there's also the classic frame drops, the whole 9... and THIS WITH ONLY 3+5 MAX on the entire server in GvG, effectively, and within the first few sieges this manifests. We let them kill maybe 10 or so total sieges, but the problems were obvious on siege #2 for yours truly. We did not go further with testing to see if arrows were not turning orange for replacements when tiles were actually fought, etc... as there is a cease fire in place and we didn't want to appear to other guilds to be in violation of it (I know it sounds silly, but there are those in both guilds that pledged their words to get others on board and none of us want any drama). My apologies to them we even did this much without getting a concensus approval, but I made the call it was better to get this done and ask forgiveness in this case. I hope they understand.
The client used to keep pace with the server very closely as to what happens on a tile, though not everyone has a fast enough setup, (possibly including low latency) to recognize that it no longer does... now there are gaps, large ones on the order of hundreds of milliseconds and stalls on the order of seconds. For casual GvG'ers this may be less of an issue, but it's certainly above and beyond typical lag, and absolutely, positively it affects the meta game I pointed out to longshanks in the "condescension-gate post". It's a serious problem on that level, to that elite... near catastrophic throw up your hands and quit for some, but even for casual GvG'ers, normal activity results in a lot of bad interface behaviors which increase the frustration level.
What I can also attest to is that both html and flash were in operation prior to this and the problem did not exist. (in June) It's more recent than that, maybe Octoberish, that I first noticed these, the latest rev of GvG impacts, but I can't rule out divergence in operation between the two being worth investigating (you know your code, I don't). Our side was all using flash... I think... maybe the 4th sieger was not...
I just want to make abs clear that this was done in the midst of the boycott or ceasefire, so 100% fixing your server load issues Is NOT a solution to this.
Sparta and Foe conducted a very basic test on E server at a calm point or dead zone in the "GvG Boycott". (FE MAP) While no one (or next to no one as there have been occasional breaches) was conducting GvG activity, we took it upon ourselves for the sake of science and getting bugs isolated to choose 4 ppl to place and replace sieges, and 3 to 5 (they had a couple loose cannons join in) on the other side simply killing sieges. No one out our side fought the tile, we all just focused on place and replace of siege.
Here were the results:
No errors (that I'm aware of for the ppl killing the sieges (athena's guild).
One of our siegers (of the 4) turns out did not know what to look for, but the other 3 out of 3 on our side did and encountered the classic behaviors posted in athena's list I have referenced here in this thread. Grey arrows, sticky tile(what that means is the siege shows as still up when its been killed and you cannot replace it - this on the order of seconds, but sometimes hangs indefintely, unable to place the siege and must exit the map and re-enter to do so, hung siege), there's also the classic frame drops, the whole 9... and THIS WITH ONLY 3+5 MAX on the entire server in GvG, effectively, and within the first few sieges this manifests. We let them kill maybe 10 or so total sieges, but the problems were obvious on siege #2 for yours truly. We did not go further with testing to see if arrows were not turning orange for replacements when tiles were actually fought, etc... as there is a cease fire in place and we didn't want to appear to other guilds to be in violation of it (I know it sounds silly, but there are those in both guilds that pledged their words to get others on board and none of us want any drama). My apologies to them we even did this much without getting a concensus approval, but I made the call it was better to get this done and ask forgiveness in this case. I hope they understand.
The client used to keep pace with the server very closely as to what happens on a tile, though not everyone has a fast enough setup, (possibly including low latency) to recognize that it no longer does... now there are gaps, large ones on the order of hundreds of milliseconds and stalls on the order of seconds. For casual GvG'ers this may be less of an issue, but it's certainly above and beyond typical lag, and absolutely, positively it affects the meta game I pointed out to longshanks in the "condescension-gate post". It's a serious problem on that level, to that elite... near catastrophic throw up your hands and quit for some, but even for casual GvG'ers, normal activity results in a lot of bad interface behaviors which increase the frustration level.
What I can also attest to is that both html and flash were in operation prior to this and the problem did not exist. (in June) It's more recent than that, maybe Octoberish, that I first noticed these, the latest rev of GvG impacts, but I can't rule out divergence in operation between the two being worth investigating (you know your code, I don't). Our side was all using flash... I think... maybe the 4th sieger was not...
I just want to make abs clear that this was done in the midst of the boycott or ceasefire, so 100% fixing your server load issues Is NOT a solution to this.
DeletedUser6219
Actually, I don't care one way or the other. It's not about hope for me. If they merely put into it what they always have, then I could argue that we have issues since October or so which are unprecedented and have not been fixed, and therefore I should expect them to be fixed (see my above post for details). I am helping to represent those who want them fixed, however, at least in so much as they are understood. Some want to brush them under the rug as though they are background noise and are rash to lump them in with trivial complaints about reset lag which Inno also has a track record on that you and I might examine.
I'm actually in your camp on basic business, and if you've read any of my posts, perhaps you'd understand that. Perhaps it is you who should re-read. I only asked if you had anything more rock solid, like a clear formal declaration from mgmt. but maybe you're getting emotional over being permitted to bash unchallenged those expressing their views?
"Maintenance. No changes. Bug fixes as needed. Everything else, lag included, just the way it is. Maintenance"
Yes, that's closer to what I was asking for at least, thx. Recall that Meat thought I was you. That's my defacto expectation in the absence of ever coming here or going to facebook and reading a single thing. I will trust that you are up on all this more than I, and you also get that same impression then.
No need for any salt, it's all good.
Goth Almighty
Active Member
Silly question time from a noob GvG fighter. Why not recalc only once a week? OK, guild rankings won't be up to date for most of the week but that seems like a small concession to make in order to solve the bigger problem. Like I said: silly question. I'm sure you all have thought of it but I haven't seen a post about it in this thread yet.
BruteForceAttack
Well-Known Member
The problem is its not just recalc time or event, there are bugs in GVG that need to be addressed and only folks who do GVG on a regular basis feel the pain.
Imagine, every other time or so when you collect your city or add fps to gbs game freezes and you have to reload the city again. Would you not complain? Add to that, you are trying to lock a spot on a gb, game freezes on you, you have to reload the game and by that time someone else locks the spot and you lose fps.
Imagine, every other time or so when you collect your city or add fps to gbs game freezes and you have to reload the city again. Would you not complain? Add to that, you are trying to lock a spot on a gb, game freezes on you, you have to reload the game and by that time someone else locks the spot and you lose fps.
Goth Almighty
Active Member
Right, I feel the pain, both from a GvGer's perspective, as well as, from a developer's perspective. The worst kind of debug is where there are multiple bugs that may or may not be related to each other. IOW, you try to solve one problem at a time and hope that each small bug fix has some effect on or fixes the whole problem. It would seem an easy enough fix to move recalc to Sun. night just to see what kind of effect that has on the GvG lag. Then, maybe solutions to the other bugs will be easier to find.
-Athena-
Active Member
Silly question time from a noob GvG fighter. Why not recalc only once a week? OK, guild rankings won't be up to date for most of the week but that seems like a small concession to make in order to solve the bigger problem. Like I said: silly question. I'm sure you all have thought of it but I haven't seen a post about it in this thread yet.
I fear my world in this game would explode/implode if calc was just once a week lol. We have a pretty dedicated crew that show up every night.
Actually quite a few guilds in my world do.DeletedUser38345
The problem is not that the re-calc needs to be moved to Sunday night. As Athena says you may as well shut it down if that's the case. The problem is that due to the 24hr protection cycle every evening there is re-calc. And there is so many people on that it lags. (The vast majority of the top tiles that can be contested, are contested for daily at re-calc). There are a few hundred players fighting on a system that is capable of possibly only 10's of people on our world alone. Multiplied by many worlds means way to many calculations and decisions need to be made by the servers, in say 3-4% of the time that it could be spread over with some changes to rule/(decision trees of logic)
That's why my suggestion is to add some kind of variable tile specific re-calc time based on when that one tile was original taken. So that as time progresses within a few weeks it becomes not one time a day that ALL things happen. But multiple times a day a few things can happen.
DeletedUser
I know this is nitpicking, but recalc is not a result of the protection cycle. It was probably convenient to end tile protection at recalc, but the main purpose of recalc is to have a consistent time each day when guild power points earned can be awarded. And it applies to all avenues of earning them in the game. GE and Hall of Fame guild power points are also credited at recalc each day.
Goth Almighty
Active Member
Starlight on Water
Member
I am hoping that more than just moderators are following this conversation/ debate/ argument. Game developers need to read Warvenya's and athena9's and others posts (including Dylan777 who stated in no uncertain terms that he has a VERY GOOD computer set up). The problem exists in ALL worlds, E world players are most vocal about this right now but for every comment you see here, a thousand agree but have not spoken up yet. Consider this a real problem that has already turned away a lot of diamond-buying players who gave up since the most fun part of this game was fighting. I know and understand those who are on phones playing have very little interaction with the finer aspects of this game, BUT since we are all mostly mobile people consider that at least 70% of those active mobile players are also fighters who use the phone version when they are away from the computer. The total of active players in any world if polled would lead to some interesting results - especially if u ask them if they fight.
RazorbackPirate
Well-Known Member
^ It is this type of elitist arrogance that gives you GvGers a bad reputation. It's also the reason why your issues continue to get very little support from the entire community. To the extent you continue to put down those who have no access to GvG is the extent they will continue to speak out against any investments into GvG that don't include them.
You think Inno doesn't know down to a person how many players fight GvG?
Keep drawing the lines of division. As they have been, the majority (mobile customers) will continue to win in both support and investment.
Last edited:
DeletedUser
As I understand things, the developers usually only read the Beta forum, not this one.
I've said this before. Inno knows how many players participate in GvG, and I know it is an exceedingly small proportion of the total number of players. I'm only restating this because it doesn't help your point to continue quoting unfounded assumptions that you've been told are wrong. I want to emphasize that I am on your side as far as fixing GvG issues. GvG players are a dedicated bunch, and deserve to enjoy GvG with minimal issues, if at all possible. However, the vast majority of active players do little or no GvG at all, and also deserve to be treated with respect. They are playing the parts of the game they enjoy, just as GvGers are, and there is no right or wrong choice in that. GvG is simply one aspect of a multi-faceted game.