Runes of Magic US / AU

Here is something that might cheer you up, people... one of the most common methods of debugging software and server issues is logging, where you record every little thing that happens, in great deal of detail, so that later on you can review the logs and see what happened and what went wrong. What do you think that extensive logging does to the performance? I tell you, it is not good.

In other words, the process of diagnosing the problem is contributing to the problem.

No post in this thread for a few days now from any staff except for saying 'stfu'.

They're just waiting for the game to die in NA. I'd say give it a rest. SW doesn't work, next, half the servers will go down and they'll shut down the NA side. Save your fingers, time to start looking for a different game that's worth throwing money at.

I'll log on to do my dailies and other daily tasks, maybe run a few things, but other than that, this game lost my money and my time a long time ago. Time to just move on. I'm just fine saving my money or paying a subscription for WoW or other games which are more stable than spend $200.00 to regear after the last update that added Tergothen Bay, only to see my money get thrown away by piss poor decisions by the publisher or developer. Even if they somehow magically start listening to people and doing something about all the issues that make this game largely unplayable, they still at least won't get anymore of my money.

This is truely an amazing game, and one that has a ton of potential. If they had the growth that they said they had after Chapter 3 was released of tons of new accounts, this should give them the hint that something in the game is truely amazing, but apparently they can't even listen to that.

It might be the publisher's fault, it might be the developers, hell, it might be the janitor's fault when he swept the floor under the servers or vaccuumed the data off a hard drive. One thing is for sure...what MMORPG doesn't have some sort of guild wars and battlegrounds nowadays? With SW failure, RoM doesn't. It needs to be fixed if this game is going to last, or it will die when other games are released this year. I'm surprised we didn't lose more people to Skyrim or anything.

Stickying this thread as the official Siege war lag issue thread. Please post your discussion of the issue here instead of creating repeat threads, thank you.

Quoted from "Jguy;508473"

They're just waiting for the game to die in NA. I'd say give it a rest. SW doesn't work, next, half the servers will go down and they'll shut down the NA side. Save your fingers, time to start looking for a different game that's worth throwing money at.

Didnt you know thats why they moved the servers to Florida? They relocated them to the server retirement home, and are waiting for them to go quietly into the night. Until then, only visiting on holidays.

Quoted from "Jguy;508473"

They're just waiting for the game to die in NA.

I doubt that. When you read the statements signed by Gerhard A. Koning who is Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats (Chairman of the Audit Board) for Frogster (the real one), you learn two interesting things on ROM:

1) The Board intends to continue to focus on Western Europe and North America markets, where the Frogster group already successful.

2) The Board is very pleased with the positive development of the company. In particular, the Massively multiplayer online game 'Runes of Magic', which by the Company and its subsidiaries in German, English, French, Spanish, Polish and Korean Language is in Europe, North America and Korea, publishes, markets and operates, has the very dynamic development of the company forward. Based on the success of 'Runes of Magic', the Frogster group reached 2010, a significant increase in sales, a good Return on sales, the creation of more than 30 new jobs and not least a significant Increase in the share price.

But I have to say Jguy that I have a similar feeling sometimes...

Quoted from "Jguy;508473"

This is truely an amazing game, and one that has a ton of potential. If they had the growth that they said they had after Chapter 3 was released of tons of new accounts, this should give them the hint that something in the game is truely amazing, but apparently they can't even listen to that.

I suppose its really hard to focus on this game when they have another brand new MMO coming out in the next couple of months. We've already lost about 8 members in the past two weeks from our guild because of this nonsense. Think we all get the hint. Its not like siege has changed drastically over the years. We don't like the new servers and we don't like to have our gm's fired and replaced by people who can't give us the attention we need and deserve.Siege is one of the biggest parts of this game and many people play for the sole purpose of gearing up and showing off in siege. Three year beta or not the people have spoken. Theres no way you guys missed all these posts.

I'll take my best stab at this, tank gear ready and healers standing by.

The questions about the beta status I feel were answered by vfwiffo.

Also it is important to not get mixed up with the types of issues, As Roeksha pointed out in the linked post here the server issues are something we are investigating on our end and is not related to the BETA of siege wars. This issue is being investigated and several solutions have been tried and failed.

At this time there is no ETA on fixes, if this changes we will let you know.

Please understand these are really complex issues, as a player myself I understand the whole "fix it now!" mentality, But its not a matter of simply flipping a switch, and as I said before, several solutions have been attempted so far regarding the server related issues but to no avail. We will continue looking for a solution, but this takes time.

We already have a very large thread about the siege related issues here, I'm going to re-title it and merge this thread with it. In order to save repeat threads on this topic, I will ask that you guys post there.

I think I answered every question asked here to the best of my ability, I'm sure a million more will spawn in their place, but I still have hp left, so I will prepare for the next wave!

Quoted from "Aetherth;508494"

I'll take my best stab at this, tank gear ready and healers standing by.

The questions about the beta status I feel were answered by vfwiffo.

Also it is important to not get mixed up with the types of issues, As Roeksha pointed out in the linked post here the server issues are something we are investigating on our end and is not related to the BETA of siege wars. This issue is being investigated and several solutions have been tried and failed.

At this time there is no ETA on fixes, if this changes we will let you know.

Please understand these are really complex issues, as a player myself I understand the whole "fix it now!" mentality, But its not a matter of simply flipping a switch, and as I said before, several solutions have been attempted so far regarding the server related issues but to no avail. We will continue looking for a solution, but this takes time.

We already have a very large thread about the siege related issues here, I'm going to re-title it and merge this thread with it. In order to save repeat threads on this topic, I will ask that you guys post there.

I think I answered every question asked here to the best of my ability, I'm sure a million more will spawn in their place, but I still have hp left, so I will prepare for the next wave!

Have you tried feeding the hamsters a 5-hour energy drink?

Hi. Though it makes no sense to me how a client side IP-reset would help, I've read that it does in two places. The only reason i could think of is that the server somehow might prioritize younger connections over older ones. Is there any truth to that theory? It seems like I'm always one of the first to lag or not get in at all, but our modem isn't dynamic so I can't reset it easily to test the theory myself.

This issue seems to have borked the Arena as well (1 vs 1,3 vs 3,6 vs 6 etc.) Yesterday me and several guildies had problems when trying to enter. Example a party tries to enter 3 vs 3. 1 Person gets in while the other two dissappear and end up at the login screen. The other players on the other team did get in. Same thing seemed to happen sporadically with entering 1 vs 1. So seems that siege isn't the only pvp battlefield suffering from problems. Not sure if this was brought up earlier as there is so many posts to skim through but thought it worth a mention.

FA Probably is trying to work on fixing it, but we are not told anything but the normal once every week them saying we are trying.

We play this game, we like to feel a part of it. We want to know info from you guys every other day. Tell us what have you tried. Let us know you still have new plans. Tell us what you think could be the problem. Make us feel like we are part of the family. Not just ignore us and try to fix it. We want to be filled in.

A post like what you did today helps. Now i know there is no ETA of fix, and you guys have tried things but didn't work. The thing is, it will take another week to get info like that. We are left in the dark with only light coming to us once a week.

Here is the proper way to test siege problems. Tester creates 2 guilds with 10 players each and registers and starts the siege with alll 20 accounts. All accounts should attempt to enter the siege at the same time.

After that each toon drinks a pot every 30 seconds. That is best way to detect the lag - the delay between taking an action and seeing the effect of it on a screen is rather obvious.

After lag starts, some of the affected players would have to start start reloging (at some point relog will grant you "good slot" so administrator could look at logs and see what is the difference between good and bad slot)

If Frogster does not have computers or people to do this, I am sure volunteers would be easy to find.

Quoted from "Aetherth;508494"

This issue is being investigated and several solutions have been tried and failed.

At this time there is no ETA on fixes, if this changes we will let you know.

Please understand these are really complex issues, as a player myself I understand the whole "fix it now!" mentality, But its not a matter of simply flipping a switch, and as I said before, several solutions have been attempted so far regarding the server related issues but to no avail. We will continue looking for a solution, but this takes time.

OK, so you complain that you are testing solutions but the solutions take time. The bigger problem from the community is that many proposed solutions have been ignored or locked. I even posted to the constructive feedback section a new thread on the 27th of last month that was summarily restricted to all other users save GMs to post in:

Quoted from "Deltaninethc;505691"

This problem with the stress test that you are having an issue recreating on your own can be solved. Enlist the player base for a second round of siege in the mornings until the solution is found. A tertiary siege midday might even be possible. The full population that is represented at evening siege times might not even be necessary for a useful test. We have asked for a chance to become involved via a test server for other issues many times before. Perhaps it is time to listen to us.

Additionally, I'll add my own observations on the issue. The lag looks suspiciously like bandwidth throttling on the part of the owners of the server bank you switched to. The fact that it occurs midway through siege makes it look like an automatic response to an increased server load.

ISP's have also been known to throttle certain types of traffic and we ARE talking about Miami here. I'm not sure what kind of WAN access is used by the server bank but it is worth looking into.

How about giving us some feedback? Have you even bothered to use network analysis to see if throttling is occurring or are our suggestions being passed off as sophomoric suggestions by an uninformed user base? If not, now might be the time to let us know that you have considered it and are running the analyses.

Additionally, as I suggested in the thread that you functionally locked, adding additional siege wars every day could increase your opportunity to test for problems. Or are you content with just ignoring the issue hoping that we eventually forget about siege war just like every other part of the system that you decided was too much of a headache to maintain? You keep saying you're working on it but we see 0 indication that that is the truth. Quite to the contrary, it would seem that your solution to the problem is to lock threads and shut down conversation.

While I think multiple sieges during the day would be a great idea in general, it is probably out of the breadth of frogsters capability. But this does bring about a good point. What if they change the time of siege (not the server time) to an hour earlier for one day and an hour later for the next day.

If it shows the same performance issues at 3 different time slots then it confirms that it is either network or performance capping out.

If it only shows during one or two of the time slots, then you have a time window of what is causing the problem and don't need to be chasing network performance issues but finding out what the server is doing during that time window.

The fact that ping is relatively consistent throughout all of siege leads me to believe in the second scenario, that something is operating in a set time window that is affecting how siege operates.

Quoted from "sertet;508525"

The fact that ping is relatively consistent throughout all of siege leads me to believe in the second scenario, that something is operating in a set time window that is affecting how siege operates.

Ping, much like other diagnostic packets, would be a ICMP packet. The majority of other packets would be TCP. TCP most certainly can be throttled with no effects to UDP.

Quoted from "Deltaninethc;508559"

Ping, much like other diagnostic packets, would be a UDP packet. The majority of other packets would be TCP. TCP most certainly can be throttled with no effects to UDP.

ping is actually what they call ICMP, but we get what you're saying.

EDIT: on second thought, in-game ping may or may not actually be ICMP like an ordinary command line "ping" is, but I'm doubting it's UDP since UDP doesn't have handshaking and therefore receiving is unverified.

Quoted from "donmuerte;508561"

ping is actually what they call ICMP

Yeah, the automatic kick that tells me I am banned and it will never get lifted hit before I could edit.

Same idea applies though. Different packets can be filtered and throttled.

Quoted from "donmuerte;508561"

EDIT: on second thought, in-game ping may or may not actually be ICMP like an ordinary command line "ping" is, but I'm doubting it's UDP since UDP doesn't have handshaking and therefore receiving is unverified.

I would imagine that the in-game ping monitor just reflects pings that are sent in a way that are functionally the same as a command line ping.

Quoted from "vfwiffo;508471"

Here is something that might cheer you up, people... one of the most common methods of debugging software and server issues is logging, where you record every little thing that happens, in great deal of detail, so that later on you can review the logs and see what happened and what went wrong. What do you think that extensive logging does to the performance? I tell you, it is not good.

In other words, the process of diagnosing the problem is contributing to the problem.

...OR you just hit the nail on the head. maybe old siege servers had logging off; new siege servers have it on; resources are overloaded and commands are throttled. maybe it's as simple as shutting off the debug mode or lowering the severity level...

???

a sysadmin should never admit this, but I have had logs set too low in severity completely fill up a hard disk before. running out of inodes is another annoying little demon.

.

Oh well, no joy.

.