AMA Response, please abandon 1 world commitment in favor of a better gameplay experience POLL

Do not sacrifice a great gameplay experience / ping to maintain a 1 world commitment.

  • Agree

  • Disagree


Results are only viewable after voting.

Javelin

Member
Nov 13, 2020
28
40
13
I might be alone in this and so this might be a lost cause request but hear me out.

In listening to the AMA I understand a lot of work has already been done to try and normalize ping between players. They are fighting against technology and internet being behind the ability to do this though. On top of this they are a small studio with a small budget and are trying to do something that Epic Games can't solve with billions of dollars behind them.

Why is it so important that NA players play with EU? We have different sleep schedules, we are on different time zones, when one guild is awake another is asleep.

Why is it worth sacrificing ping, sacrificing faster gameplay just to include everyone around the world on 1 server cluster when none of us can really play together anyway other then a small few who work nights or for some reason are on flipped time schedules. All this does is open the door to offline sieging, that's it. That's all you gain if you can even call it a gain, destroying other guilds stuff when they aren't able to defend because they're asleep.

It's so counter productive to creating a successful experience. There's a reason you don't see other games doing this in twitch based games, it sacrifices too much from the user experience and forces you to make cuts to core gameplay mechanics in order to satisfy it. Rather than concentrating on building the best possible user experience you end up wrestling with the tech instead of working within what already works.

I get that this was promised at some point, I get that there are players that want to play with NA players and that's fine, so let those players access NA servers and vice versa and let your users personally choose if they want to sacrifice their gameplay experience rather then force it upon everyone. Give options and stop trying to invent new technology, refocus on making a great game experience instead.

The work that's been done to normalize ping is still useful and in fact would perform even better if the world was split into 2 regional continental servers, so it's not like it will go to waste.

I'll add a poll for a simple agree / disagree, I don't really want to get into a debate over it but getting a community weigh in will help me and some others determine if this game is even worth my time or not.
 

barcode

Active member
Jun 2, 2020
204
189
43
the problem is critical mass. MMOs need a certain amount of active players in order to provide a good experience, but will MO be able to draw in those crowds? after the initial surge, will there be enough players to sustain multiple instances? once population wanes, the servers would likely be better off if they can be merged, but that poses its own problems.

for fast paced melee combat there is no question that multiple servers will provide a better experience. MO is more than just mordhau/chivalry style melee combat, but is melee combat the 'killer' feature of MO (i.e. people would buy the game solely for the melee combat experience)? for many that may be the case and they just want mordhau/chivalry in a larger scale with rpg elements. will it be enough to sustain critical mass? i dont know.

henrik's idea of different MO continents being on different real world continents just means whenever going to the other continent, you'll be the red-headded step child once again.

at this point it comes down to market research and guesstimates, will the improved combat bring in enough bodies for critical mass on multiple instances?

-barcode
 
  • Like
Reactions: OreAird and Xervoz

Bernfred

Active member
Sep 12, 2020
388
239
43
are you guys out of your mind...
beside a ping increasement for NAs (for destroying the game) you gain nothing.
you need to add servers in every region before you can balance the game to a regional server game. there are not only NAs and EUs.
always the same people who want just another mordhau experience whereas the most people in MO are old boys with granny hands.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OreAird

Handsome Young Man

Well-known member
Jun 13, 2020
690
512
93
are you guys out of your mind...
beside a ping increasement for NAs (for destroying the game) you gain nothing.
you need to add servers in every region before you can balance the game to a regional server game. there are not only NAs and EUs.
always the same people who want just another mordhau experience whereas the most people in MO are old boys with granny hands.
So everyone should just accept EU players will have a superior connection, once again, and everyone else is just stuck with dealing with it on top of a busted, crutched system that is going to promote zerging?

Sorry, but this is just flawed in favor of being biased.

I think there needs to be a NA server and an EU server. Players can still freely choose which one they want to play on, can even have characters on both.

Trust me, I'm an advocate of one server one player base for number sakes but if the game is good then shouldn't the players come? Using a numbers argument is in itself a double edged sword, the fact it is one single server is a reason alone to not play.

If you told someone this really cool MMO was being developed but they were going to always have 100+ ping or higher that would probably be pretty off putting. We who are apart of the MO community are major outliers in dealing with it.

Just do a centralized server for NA and a centralized server for EU, then you won't have to take extra steps fucking up the combat to suit ping related issues.

And yeah. This might sound rude but AU, OCE, etc. players probably deserve their own server as well but IDK if it would get much traction.

It should never be "yeah but the game won't have enough pop"

The game should just be made well and then the population will come.
 

Handsome Young Man

Well-known member
Jun 13, 2020
690
512
93
the problem is critical mass. MMOs need a certain amount of active players in order to provide a good experience, but will MO be able to draw in those crowds? after the initial surge, will there be enough players to sustain multiple instances? once population wanes, the servers would likely be better off if they can be merged, but that poses its own problems.

for fast paced melee combat there is no question that multiple servers will provide a better experience. MO is more than just mordhau/chivalry style melee combat, but is melee combat the 'killer' feature of MO (i.e. people would buy the game solely for the melee combat experience)? for many that may be the case and they just want mordhau/chivalry in a larger scale with rpg elements. will it be enough to sustain critical mass? i dont know.

henrik's idea of different MO continents being on different real world continents just means whenever going to the other continent, you'll be the red-headded step child once again.

at this point it comes down to market research and guesstimates, will the improved combat bring in enough bodies for critical mass on multiple instances?

-barcode
To counter this way of thinking, Henrik is made MO1 and is now making MO2 out of passion - not for money sakes.

While I'm sure one of his goals is to make it successful, Henrik is wanting a vision of his to come true. If he was given the opportunity to be filthy rich or have an amazing game... I'm betting he would go with the later as his career thus far has been devoted to it - regardless of numbers.

MO1 never really had amazing numbers to begin with, yet it still ran for 10+ years and is still running.

MO2 has the potential to be a game changer with new marketing, new technology, and a game engine that is consistently updated without weird coding limitations.
 

Teknique

Well-known member
Jun 15, 2020
805
584
93
the problem is critical mass. MMOs need a certain amount of active players in order to provide a good experience, but will MO be able to draw in those crowds? after the initial surge, will there be enough players to sustain multiple instances? once population wanes, the servers would likely be better off if they can be merged, but that poses its own problems.

for fast paced melee combat there is no question that multiple servers will provide a better experience. MO is more than just mordhau/chivalry style melee combat, but is melee combat the 'killer' feature of MO (i.e. people would buy the game solely for the melee combat experience)? for many that may be the case and they just want mordhau/chivalry in a larger scale with rpg elements. will it be enough to sustain critical mass? i dont know.

henrik's idea of different MO continents being on different real world continents just means whenever going to the other continent, you'll be the red-headded step child once again.

at this point it comes down to market research and guesstimates, will the improved combat bring in enough bodies for critical mass on multiple instances?

-barcode
Its going to be some complex calculation on what the ideal amount of servers would be. How many people could you fit into one house before things got unbearable and you were bumping into people everywhere and people were literally pooping on you because its so crowded. That population will be unsustainable and could exist more happily in say two houses. For a global game whats the ideal amount of servers? That's speculation but I can almost guarantee its greater than one.

To counter this way of thinking, Henrik is made MO1 and is now making MO2 out of passion - not for money sakes.

While I'm sure one of his goals is to make it successful, Henrik is wanting a vision of his to come true. If he was given the opportunity to be filthy rich or have an amazing game... I'm betting he would go with the later as his career thus far has been devoted to it - regardless of numbers.

MO1 never really had amazing numbers to begin with, yet it still ran for 10+ years and is still running.
The man deserves a lot of respect for this reason.
 

barcode

Active member
Jun 2, 2020
204
189
43
To counter this way of thinking, Henrik is made MO1 and is now making MO2 out of passion - not for money sakes.

While I'm sure one of his goals is to make it successful, Henrik is wanting a vision of his to come true. If he was given the opportunity to be filthy rich or have an amazing game... I'm betting he would go with the later as his career thus far has been devoted to it - regardless of numbers.

MO1 never really had amazing numbers to begin with, yet it still ran for 10+ years and is still running.

MO2 has the potential to be a game changer with new marketing, new technology, and a game engine that is consistently updated without weird coding limitations.
numbers are not just for monies (tho that doesnt hurt) but for achieving the 'critical mass' required for a healthy running game world. any mmo needs a certain number of players actively playing for the world to function. MO1 lost this number long ago but people squeak by with multiple accounts and endless alts.

-barcode
 

Handsome Young Man

Well-known member
Jun 13, 2020
690
512
93
numbers are not just for monies (tho that doesnt hurt) but for achieving the 'critical mass' required for a healthy running game world. any mmo needs a certain number of players actively playing for the world to function. MO1 lost this number long ago but people squeak by with multiple accounts and endless alts.

-barcode
And I think in a way the single server contributed to it, even if it wasn't at the forefront of issues.

There was tons of vulnerabilities in MO1 through bugs, exploits, and cheating. There was severe balance issues through out it, sloppy patches that came out unfinished, half-baked - only to be dumped onto by the next sloppy half-baked patch. Tons of spaghetti code in a near 'hacked version' of Unreal Engine 3 (Or as I dub the Frankenstein Engine, as it was more like UE 3.5 with differences from 3 but not necessarily better.) Server issues, corrupt staff, an outsourced world revamp that messed it up (And made it uglier), a badly carried over flagging system that had numerous issues, design choices that forced really stupid character designs (i.e. A weapon crafter is a weapon crafter, and nothing else. Basically sits in-front of a bench, crafts, then logs off. Not fun / engaging. Also took up 1 of your 4 slots. That you had to pay for.)

I could go on, obviously. My point is sure there were a lot of issues that were way more obvious, but the ping was VERY INTIMATE with anyone who would PvE or PvP (The PvE was later 'fixed' with a change in the way AI handled their attacks, it was delayed from their animations.) But the PvP?

The fundamentals, the core that made up the combat in MO1 wasn't bad. It was the ping that was bad. When people say it looked like 'ice skating' and it looked 'unrealistic' this was because of ping issues. That's what happens when you have people with 100+ ping playing against one another, and now the 'solution' in MO2 is to gut the combat system in exchange for everyone to be on the same playing field but with combat that now suffers horrendously.

I saw that Henrik has now sped up 'click' attacks, but I don't really see that doing too much unless the whole system is sped up. I'm just going to say it now - might be an opinion you guys might hate, but...

I WOULD RATHER HAVE DESYNC WITH FAST COMBAT, WHERE PEOPLE CAN BE BOTH AGGRESSIVE AND DEFENSIVE, RATHER THAN SLOW COMBAT WHERE PEOPLE CAN ONLY BE SUPER DEFENSIVE AND AGGRESSIVE PLAY IS ONLY DONE THROUGH BEING SUPER DEFENSIVE.

But, guess what? If I had a server I could connect to that wasn't 100+ ping I wouldn't have to worry about desync then the combat could be faster and it'd be fine.
 

Kaemik

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2020
704
374
63
If the focus of the game is super-fast action-based gameplay but it also promises 1 server in the same info blurb. I think this world is going to feel dead and empty spread across 2-3 servers. Like we better have really good PVE if we do that as given the map size that's going to be 95% of our content if we divide the population in half.

I'd prefer the combat to while remaining first-person and fairly actiony, but also make things other than how fast you can throw your mouse around to parry from different directions be the primary focus of who wins group fights. Things like having the right group composition or smart usage of spells and special abilities should be the primary focus. And fuck 1v1s / the idea melee should be able to beat everything 1v1 that's not what MMOs are built for. If nothing else it's pretty much given mounted archers will trash melees in any kind of 1v1 fight unless the melee works ranged abilities into their build or the MA is braindead. Also kind of a given the MA will get away even if the melee does have a bow and starts winning. Tactics are going to be huge in this game due to the very nature of being open world and having a large build variety with things like movespeed being very different from build to build.

Also, isn't the biggest new story for gamers right now about how Elon Musk is trying to bring us all global highspeed internet? Going with a slower single server game right now doesn't mean it can't be sped up a bit if technology makes that feasible in a few years.
 
Last edited:

Putzin

Member
Oct 14, 2020
95
89
18
I would love to have 1 NA and 1 EU server with every players account allowing you to have 1 character on each.
 

Handsome Young Man

Well-known member
Jun 13, 2020
690
512
93
If the focus of the game is super-fast action-based gameplay but it also promises 1 server in the same info blurb. I think this world is going to feel dead and empty spread across 2-3 servers. Like we better have really good PVE if we do that as given the map size that's going to be 95% of our content if we divide the population in half.

I'd prefer the combat to while remaining first-person and fairly actiony, make things other than how fast you can throw your mouse around to parry from different directions be the primary focus of who wins group fights. Things like having the right group composition or smart usage of spells and special abilities should be the primary focus. And fuck 1v1s / the idea melee should be able to beat everything 1v1 that's not what MMOs are built for. If nothing else it's pretty much given mounted archers will trash melees in any kind of 1v1 fight unless the melee works ranged abilities into their build or the MA is braindead. Also kind of a given the MA will get away even if the melee does have a bow and starts winning. Tactics are going to be huge in this game due to the very nature of being open world and having a large build variety with things like movespeed being very different from build to build.

Also, isn't the biggest new story for gamers right now about how Elon Musk is trying to bring us all global highspeed internet? Going with a slower single server game right now doesn't mean it can't be sped up a bit if technology makes that feasible in a few years.
I genuinely think if the game could avoid a lot of the ping-balances that we've gone through, and they just focused on making the core game better rather than worrying about additions to the game while trying to compensate across a spectrum of latencies from region to region - I think the numbers would come. Good gameplay will trump population slashes, and.. lets not forget - It's important to let players choose where they want to go. If an NA player wants to play on an EU server, then sure, vice versa. If it was forced - I wouldn't agree with it.

I'd also again say, you should be able to play on both servers, a separate character for each. That way you're not truly locked out of interacting with parts of the community. It would also give players with different time schedules to lets say play with their friends on the NA server, but when they hop off to go to bed but you're still going to be awake; maybe you can go play with your EU friends now on the EU server.

Could this be made easier with one server, of course. But then again as @Teknique said, we run into things that limit what SV can do and they have to balance things whilst tip-toeing to avoid.
 

Handsome Young Man

Well-known member
Jun 13, 2020
690
512
93
This is just a spitballed idea, so don't take this suggestion as something I want or would advocate as it just came off the top of my head.

I'd go as far as to say if it would be possible to have one character, be able to log into either server. That way your character carries over (Only stats, skills, etc.)

Things like banks, equipped items, gold.. Material items that are worn, used, stored, owned, etc. should be separate - but the character itself should be freely used in either server.

Log in / out locations should also be different. If I log out in a house on the NA server, I shouldn't log into the EU server in the same spot. This would present an exploitable mechanic.

Could be interesting, and it would retain the one character identity.
 

Kaemik

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2020
704
374
63
I genuinely think if the game could avoid a lot of the ping-balances that we've gone through, and they just focused on making the core game better rather than worrying about additions to the game while trying to compensate across a spectrum of latencies from region to region
Magic, taming, mounted combat, domination and necromancy aren't additions to the game. They're core features we were all promised. Like I want my money back if these don't all make it into the game (other than maybe necromancy) over the next year. I'd consider it a major failure on SV's part if all of that except necromancy doesn't it in day 1 of release even.

The problem is we're doing all these ping balances before the more ping neutral roles make it in. Most of the people being forced to play melee currently won't even give a crap even when the more ping-neutral roles are implemented.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vagrant