Fix the Lag in BAF
Or you can just form lowman BAFs.
<:[ shark goes nom nom nom ]:>
[QUOTE=theOcho;3409811]As to the REAL reason I'll be leaving, I'm afraid it is indeed because Tamaki Revolution dc'd on me during a RSF.[/QUOTE]
They don't need to spend money increasing the server's performance, they don't need to devote a lot of time and resources to this issue.
All they have to do is cap the number of people allowed into BAF at one time to 16. It is a simple fix that would take less than 3 minutes to implement. |
Pretty amazing, really, how much difference it makes. It also means you start your BAF a hell of a lot earlier...not having to wait for those last handful of people.
Paragon Wiki: http://www.paragonwiki.com
City Info Terminal: http://cit.cohtitan.com
Mids Hero Designer: http://www.cohplanner.com
All they have to do is cap the number of people allowed into BAF at one time to 16. It is a simple fix that would take less than 3 minutes to implement.
|
Just like TF minimums annoy players, low max limits on participation do too.
You have the choice available to you now. Just exercise it.
"Null is as much an argument "for removing the cottage rule" as the moon being round is for buying tennis shoes." -Memphis Bill
If there is someone advertising a team in Broadcast and there isn;t enough remaining players to start a new team. My options are take the lagfest or do nothing.
I am not always in control of how many people are in a BAF. Some people fill it right up because they have no idea how the game is played, give them the option to do something and they will regardless of how much it hurts the team.
Saying "just stick with 16 men" is akin to Steel Canyon crashing everytime there is more than 20 people in there and expecting me to monitor it's usage so I can go in without crashing the zone.
I don't pay for this game to sit around waiting nor do I pay for this game to deal with these issues that can be fixed with a few minutes work.
Yest clearly you pay to sit around and complain when an easy solution is readily available to you. If other players are recuiting full sized BAFs, and other players aren't willing to listen to smart advice stated in a reasonable manner, then other players are your problem not the game.
Also [standard code rant applies] you have no clue how long it would take to chance so don't act like you do.
"Null is as much an argument "for removing the cottage rule" as the moon being round is for buying tennis shoes." -Memphis Bill
Yest clearly you pay to sit around and complain when an easy solution is readily available to you. If other players are recuiting full sized BAFs, and other players aren't willing to listen to smart advice stated in a reasonable manner, then other players are your problem not the game.
|
Using 24 players is fine if the game can support it but the amount of lag we endure suggests the game cannot. Enabling a feature of the game which is cannot support is poor design.
Look I can underline things too!
Yest clearly you pay to sit around and complain when an easy solution is readily available to you. If other players are recuiting full sized BAFs, and other players aren't willing to listen to smart advice stated in a reasonable manner, then other players are your problem not the game.
|
(That said, I don't actually recall getting lag in any lately past the ever popular prisoner phase, and even that's been reduced. But I don't run a lot of them.)
I just stick to 16-18 man bafs, and I rarely see a full 24 anymore. I just got a new PC, and was pleased to get on a 24 man over the weekend, which ran with barely a hint of lag, validating the nice new computer's gaming mojo for me.
Those who can do 24's should be able to.
My scrapper doesn't need an AoE. She IS an AoE.
I just stick to 16-18 man bafs, and I rarely see a full 24 anymore. I just got a new PC, and was pleased to get on a 24 man over the weekend, which ran with barely a hint of lag, validating the nice new computer's gaming mojo for me.
Those who can do 24's should be able to. |
I have a strogn internet connection and a solid rig too but I am subject to it's effects. I do live in Australia and have a higher ping but that ping isn't any worse in Baf or standing around in an unoccupied zone like Bloody Bay.
I'm not sure how you managed to have good performance in a 24 man BAF, maybe it was an aberration, maybe there wasn't a single pet or pet effect on the field and that made the difference or maybe and this I suspect is why people continue to run 24 man BAFs; They don't actually realize is it causing them lag - just FYI when you try to activate a long recharge ability that appears ready to use but instead of activation it gives a "recharging" message, that is lag.
Maybe it is something else too, that "recharging" effect might be due to a combination of lag and a whole lot of +recharge in your build. I might have to test that.
That is absurd.
Using 24 players is fine if the game can support it but the amount of lag we endure suggests the game cannot. Enabling a feature of the game which is cannot support is poor design. Look I can underline things too! |
If it never ever ever worked right, you might have a point.
"Null is as much an argument "for removing the cottage rule" as the moon being round is for buying tennis shoes." -Memphis Bill
"Null is as much an argument "for removing the cottage rule" as the moon being round is for buying tennis shoes." -Memphis Bill
They don't need to spend money increasing the server's performance, they don't need to devote a lot of time and resources to this issue.
All they have to do is cap the number of people allowed into BAF at one time to 16. It is a simple fix that would take less than 3 minutes to implement.