As long as the servers stand in the EU its fine with me if the Us players get bad ping.
Nice attitude. Trust me if one or the other has to get bad ping it will be euro. Anet are American after all.
Which, I think, is exactly his point. The majority of this thread has been about “EU players will be fine connecting to NA”. He was probably trying to bait a response like that in order to reveal the irony that is rife in this thread.
Auroraglade Epistemic.8013: Guys this is bullkitten a sentient plant creature is hitting these
wooden doors with fireballs and it’s working.
As long as the servers stand in the EU its fine with me if the Us players get bad ping.
Nice attitude. Trust me if one or the other has to get bad ping it will be euro. Anet are American after all.
Which, I think, is exactly his point. The majority of this thread has been about “EU players will be fine connecting to NA”. He was probably trying to bait a response like that in order to reveal the irony that is rife in this thread.
Maybe. I’m oceanic so my ping is terrible regardless. I think it’s a bad idea but won’t effect me much in any case.
There are better ways than either all in US or all in Germany.
You can determine where the majority of players of a match comes from and assign the match there, then only the minority of a match has worser ping.
You can assign servers based on time, at EU primetime the match is running on a server in Germany, at US primetime it’s running in US. So matches switch server every 12 hours.
Or most advanced you run matches on pairs of US-German servers.
You can determine where the majority of players of a match comes from and assign the match there, then only the minority of a match has worser ping.
Good idea, however, people are already complaining about being 5v40 in WvW. That situation is actually unfair to the 5-man group.
The inverse is probably a better idea, make the server with more WvW participation (not active players) take the latency hit. The “outgunned” buff would then be having a latency advantage.
Is it just me, or are these ideas getting more and more desperate? Especially considering that this isn’t broken right now (it’s a nice-to-have), do we actually want to go and add to the issues that people are complaining about in WvW?
Auroraglade Epistemic.8013: Guys this is bullkitten a sentient plant creature is hitting these
wooden doors with fireballs and it’s working.
@zamalek: This is about merging EU-NA servers and build matches of the merged servers. In that case 40vs5 is not necessarily 40 EU vs 5 NA, but it maybe 20 NA+20 EU vs 5 NA.
Assigning it to the minority (EU) doesn’t help the smaller team (all in NA).
Interesting thought. Can you have 2 hosts at the same time for wvw? It probably isn’t possible, but I wonder if you could have NA on NA host while EU on EU host, at the same time.
Why not. Every critical process that is controlled by computers (Gw isn’t such a thing, but this is in production e.g. at nuclear plants since >30 years) is controlled by at least 2 mirrored computer, such that if one fails the other can take over immediately.
You can do it as follows:
Every client sends everything to both servers (instead of just 1), both servers compute the state and sends the infos out to just “their” regionally assigned clients.
As there is always some loss, both servers sync for critical actions like events.
Combining EU and NA regions would definitely be a great idea, not just in wvw but in every part of the game. But I guess it’s just cheaper for them to do it this way.
Also, I’m euro playing on NA server and I can confirm that delay is minimum, almost impossible to notice. Anyway, it’s not like this game has PD/PB mesmers or d-shot rangers so you would have to cry about 0.25sec delay.
Also, I’m euro playing on NA server and I can confirm that delay is minimum, almost impossible to notice. Anyway, it’s not like this game has PD/PB mesmers or d-shot rangers so you would have to cry about 0.25sec delay.
And it has already been confirmed in this thread and numerous others, that it is not minimal for everyone, if you wish to choose to play on NA that is your choice, many of us have no wish to.
Fortunately Anet have already stated they will not be removing the EU/NA distinctions as unsurprisingly they have a better grasp of the performance implications, than some of those here.
The current state of WvW is really bland. The only change in rankings is from the same servers moving up and down the same tier, or mass transfers off servers.
They don’t have an ocean separating them, nor are they a concurrent simulation. Absolutely everything that happens in the world needs to be kept synced to ensure that the concurrent reality doesn’t start to diverge.
At first take it might seem that getting two pieces of identical code to run the same should be fairly easy and straightforward — not so. [snip] A deer slightly out of alignment when the random map was created would forage slightly differently — and minutes later a villager would path a tiny bit off, or miss with his spear and take home no meat. So what showed up as a checksum difference as different food amounts had a cause that was sometimes puzzling to trace back to the original cause.
Tell me what happens when an NA player and EU player kill each other, practically the same real-world time, both are 50ms away from their home server – both servers report to the killing of the opponent to the players and the survival of the players themselves. Keep in mind that each player would see themselves as having more health than they have at the opponent’s server. Next thing a sync happens and POP! You are both dead. What happens if you dealt damage to another player in the brief period that you were (incorrectly) alive. I would love to see what players would have to say about ‘bugs’ like this.
I don’t think that an unimportant thing like a player kills or get killed need to be synced.
Your server decide if you are dead or not. And the other players server decide if the other player is dead. And if the outcome is that both, none or one or the other is dead this is all fine. We do not talk about 1vs1 duels here, we talk about WvW.
It doesn’t really matter for the outcome of WvW how these decisions are made. They are defined to be correct just by being made. The only thing that matters is that they are unambiguous. And that does not need that both servers are in the same state, it only needs that there is a clear assignment of which server decide for which player.
Then the server (and all it’s clients) which is not the authority for a player will notice the fate of the player one cycle later. I.e. you see the player still up, when he is already down, or you see him in downstate, when he is de facto already up again. This delay happens also with 1 server and distant clients and cannot be avoided.
Only the outcome of events is relevant for the outcome of a match, therefore only event-decisions have to be synced between the servers before they are communicated to the clients.
From what i have heard the european servers are actually located in texas USA and the NA servers being in california. This would explain why europeans who transfer to NA don’t experience a massive boost in lag because the distance between the two servers isn’t vast.
From what i have heard the european servers are actually located in texas USA and the NA servers being in california. This would explain why europeans who transfer to NA don’t experience a massive boost in lag because the distance between the two servers isn’t vast.
I heared it differently:
- Login server for anyone are in Texas
- NA game server are in California
- EU game server are in Germany
From what i have heard the european servers are actually located in texas USA and the NA servers being in california. This would explain why europeans who transfer to NA don’t experience a massive boost in lag because the distance between the two servers isn’t vast.
I heared it differently:
- Login server for anyone are in Texas
- NA game server are in California
- EU game server are in Germany
.