Skip to main content

Topic: Discussion: Population spread and server location factors (Read 14359 times) previous topic - next topic

  • MSWG
  • [*]
Re: Discussion: Population spread and server location factors
Reply #15
So for all the EU's crying the best place for the server would likely be New York because it makes it playable for west coast NA while still being playable for EU.
Says the NA player.

Yea because I believe in equality if you noticed I'm a west coast NA player so I literally can't even play this game atm without ping spiking constantly. So if all of you want whats best for the game and for it to be a healthy server you would want it to be New York as well and not be biased just because your ping is a little better when its in EU when you could gain a lot of population from simply putting server in New York so that west coast NA ping becomes a playable 80-90 like on ROA instead of the unplayable 170-220. Also most EU that I know play ROA get about 90-100 ping so its pretty damn playable and fair for NA west coast AND EU not just being selfish and keeping it in EU for a little better ping. Damn and I thought Americans were selfish.....I just don't understand how a New York server isn't win win for everyone. NA gets playable ping including west coast NA, EU would still have perfectly playable ping and you would get a healthy global server population since the ping would be more normalized for everyone instead of losing the whole west coast NA player base because EU wants a little better ping.
  • Last Edit: January 22, 2017, 11:37:29 pm by MSWG

  • nubnax
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Discussion: Population spread and server location factors
Reply #16
@MSWG
have you actually read their post or just picked out the parts you liked?

let me highlight an important point
- On the other hand, NA infrastructure is unreliable, and while latency has an impact on gameplay, it is lesser than packet losses in our experience. The improvement for west coast could prove marginal.

if the problem with the lag spikes is packet loss between east and west coast the choices of NY or london are meaningless to west coast players.
Bala Eregi - SG of Pickaxe Inc

Re: Discussion: Population spread and server location factors
Reply #17
I believe London server is the best solution.

-Both sides get good enough Ping
-Low cost
-More reliability
-Trump will probably close down your business since you are taking America's $$! (why risk it)

  • L4Mf
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Discussion: Population spread and server location factors
Reply #18
If we can get a reliable server it's all good.
Obviously as an EU player I'd preffer a server close to myself, but a NY server might make the game grow faster.

My only issue is that once location is decided, that's it. I'd like to have 2 servers once population&demand are high enough. Ofc that's a can of worms in itself :P

I trust Ub3rgames will make the right decision :)

Kjaetlan Bjornsen of Uprising

Re: Discussion: Population spread and server location factors
Reply #19
If we can get a reliable server it's all good.
Obviously as an EU player I'd preffer a server close to myself, but a NY server might make the game grow faster.

My only issue is that once location is decided, that's it. I'd like to have 2 servers once population&demand are high enough. Ofc that's a can of worms in itself :P

I trust Ub3rgames will make the right decision :)



If they needed a second server I would prefer a second continent that is based in the other city so one is eu and the other na but people can play in both of  them switching over in the sea between.
Mycke Soulslayer - Supreme General: Rastalfarian - An all Alfar clan of all play styles in all time zones, welcoming new and vet players alike.

Re: Discussion: Population spread and server location factors
Reply #20
if this game moves to NYC you will probably get more ROA Players than the other way around
Rorschach MiM

Retired:  Rorschach Greyhead / Marquez VonHinten

  • Fnights
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Discussion: Population spread and server location factors
Reply #21
No matter what, we will move closer to NA, be it London or NY.

I still think that London is the best compromise, roa servers and various player complains proved that NY infrastructure sucks and so even if London is a it more far is more stable so is better. This is what i gather around and my personal experience.
DnD full roadmap
***
Darkfall Online (Eu-1)
2009~2012
DF1 broken issues

  • MSWG
  • [*]
Re: Discussion: Population spread and server location factors
Reply #22
No matter what, we will move closer to NA, be it London or NY.

I still think that London is the best compromise, roa servers and various player complains proved that NY infrastructure sucks and so even if London is a it more far is more stable so is better. This is what i gather around and my personal experience.

The way ROA's server runs is irrelevant because the ROA devs aren't nearly as good and let the game run like crap instead of fixing it they keep delaying. I don't think DND would have this problem as them seem to be more capable and efficient at running and working on the game. Obviously your opinion is biased though because you're from EU and want that little bit of better ping instead of more players. Most of the people I know playing ROA like DND's vision much more but as we are mostly from west coast NA it is currently unplayable so we are stuck playing ROA until DND decides if they will come to New York so the west coast can have playable ping.

Re: Discussion: Population spread and server location factors
Reply #23
Question to Dev or any network experts out there. 

Let say the server was settled to be in East Coast (NY/VA).  Can Ub3r setup a dedicated VPN with optimized routing between current Paris Datacenter and the East Coast server? 

Basically the idea is to enhance the DND Client to provide players a connection choices where they can choose Direct Connect to Server or Proxy via Paris Datacenter Center for European customer .  Another words it will be like a private battleping which the European player can use to improve the connection without paying for such service.

thoughts?

  • Guy
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Discussion: Population spread and server location factors
Reply #24
Wherever we would have placed the server, there would have been a bias.
Changing from one location to another has a cost, so we don't have the luxury to do experimentation as you suggested.
That said, you caused an internal discussion, and we'll be posting in a bit all the data we have, with our potential expected inaccuracies and our decision factors.
This way, the community will understand why we haven't taken a final decision yet.

On your latest comment, are we really that optimistic? Perhaps, but we do believe that there are more players out there.
At least those that were once interested in Darkfall for its potential, but were turned away by its implementation, and that group will not play until either we do enough changes or we make them aware of New Dawn's existence.
This is why we put so much stock into the results of a marketing campaign and the trends it will show afterwards. The spread could potentially be very different, with the old population being inaccurate in spread.

Let's leave this thread for roadmap discussions, for server location, the new thread will be more appropriate.

There would be a bias, but without the option for better latency, the bias wouldn't be as big.

You're right, there was a big group that was turned away by AV implementation of Darkfall, and that was 8 years ago, majority of that group was there with hopes to relive UO pre Ascension times, which dates them even more. At this point in time, only fraction of those people will have time to play another mmo.
Times are changing, your niche slowly dies off. Take EVE for example, they are now seeing decline in their subscriber base, a sign of aging population.

Furthermore, your lack of luxury to experiment with server location, confirms even more that it will remain as is. Unless by some miracle your marketing campaign is going to be even more successful than you think, and you're the one being exceedingly optimistic already.

Nobody "experiments" with server location. Go back to RoA weirdo.

Re: Discussion: Population spread and server location factors
Reply #25
I'm obviously bias, but I really hope for a London server, if it does move to NA, I unfortunately won't be playing, I'd rather not play at all than play with high ping, call me selfish, I don't care it's just not appealing with high ping and I commend any Americans who do play here.

Ideally the game will be so popular two servers won't be a stretch and we can all play in our respective timezones.

www.twitch.tv/rawrgasmtv
Rawr Gasm - SG of Giants


Re: Discussion: Population spread and server location factors
Reply #26
Yeah , won't happen. We'll already be lucky if the third iteration got a full server

Re: Discussion: Population spread and server location factors
Reply #27
Ub3rgames; have you given up on running some area servers in different location? Is it so unfeasible? Running most stuff from London and part of areas from NY would make the most sense...

  • MSWG
  • [*]
Re: Discussion: Population spread and server location factors
Reply #28
@Ub3rgames

Here is some data for you just so you can see the ping difference for the average NA west coast player. Here is the site and data I used if you want to check for your self.

https://wondernetwork.com/pings

London to Los Angeles - 130.031ms
London to Portland      - 127.15ms
London to Seattle         - 133.455ms

New York to Los Angeles - 65.694ms
New York to Portland      - 62.326ms
New York to Seattle         - 64.603ms
  • Last Edit: January 23, 2017, 01:24:50 am by MSWG

Re: Discussion: Population spread and server location factors
Reply #29
With Brexit incoming London isnt going to be the best location anymore in my opinion.

EU Server was hosted in Amsterdam for a good while, that could be good. Then again the difference to Paris from London or Amsterdam should be marginal. There is cables that go to France same as UK.
http://www.submarinecablemap.com/

Maybe better to make the decision between NY or Paris rightaway.

- We will try to be at the gravity center of the paying population.
- We have currently great hardware, great support, great bandwidth and unlimited data transfers for 4 to 5 times less than in NA, without including bandwidth costs.

Currently there is no subscription fee, what does the paying population mean then? Everyone that ever bought the game?
Or will you look at center of active players at end of beta, because that could be your likely subscription base?

And what would a Server in London cost compared to just leaving it where it is ?
--------------------------------------------------
Ingame: Ori Ori