Jump to content


let's talk about this central server nonsense


  • Please log in to reply
157 replies to this topic

otacon237 #1 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 19:40

    Major

  • Players
  • 23443 battles
  • 4,370
  • [NA-CL] NA-CL
  • Member since:
    01-08-2012

I see a lot of people are excited about this central server and quite frankly, I don't think it's a good thing and I think it needs to be discussed in a sober light

 

1. the majority of the current players, those on the East Coast, will not benefit from this, since i'm guessing the server will move from DC to a more Midwestern location. NA west will benefit, which is all good and well, but from a strictly statistical perspective, the majority of the players will not. 

 

2. the server will experience more load, we already know how well WG's server's function

 

but these are merely "technical" concerns, and not really looking at the big picture. here's what I find personally really troubling.

 

3. the NA server is hemorrhaging players. everyone knows this by now, there's statistics to back it up, if you're going to deny this or claim it's normal, YOU WILL BE IGNORED. WOT-NEWS.com has the relevant figures. there is no denying it. by doing this central server move, WG is ACKNOWLEDGING this situation, indirectly or otherwise, but they don't seem overly concerned since many people would claim the last few patches changed the game for the worse, rather than better. 

 

4. this is not a "fix". this is cutting their losses. too many people are focused on the short term. "Yay we will consolidate our rapidly shrinking playerbase". is that really a good thing? if nothing is done to prevent said shrinking, all this will do is delay the inevitable, possibly even accelerate it (see #2). what actions is WG taking to reverse the loss of players? are they taking any? or is NA just an acceptable loss for them? I know I will not get an official WG response, but I still think it needs to be discussed



Nudnick #2 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 19:47

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 21736 battles
  • 2,467
  • Member since:
    01-06-2013
Downsizing is always a financial decision. Eventually if running the NA server costs more than they collect from NA, we'll be on the EU or Asia servers, if we still want to play.

Bsan77 #3 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 19:48

    Captain

  • Players
  • 13008 battles
  • 1,028
  • [OTTER] OTTER
  • Member since:
    07-07-2013
Oh noez my ping will go up 20ms how can I play above 300 WN8??????/s I'm from Oklahoma, so I think it's hilarious to watch people complain. My ping will be better than ever! Ha, take that! :3

enjineer #4 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 19:48

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 42099 battles
  • 2,438
  • [SIMP] SIMP
  • Member since:
    12-07-2010
A centralized server should have been what we had from day 1.

chzwhz #5 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 19:53

    Major

  • Players
  • 19517 battles
  • 3,333
  • [RAJ] RAJ
  • Member since:
    03-28-2012

Wargaming is (theoretically) fixing several major problems with this move.

The servers should never have been split in the first place, NA has never, ever, even at its highest population, ever had enough people to justify two servers.

One of the biggest complaints of all time, and probably even more so recently is the server performance. It sucks. Theoretically, Wargaming will pick a server somewhere that doesn't have nearly the issues and hopefully they will pick a hosting (I'm assuming they use one) that has a track record of speed and reliability.

The greatest influx of players to NA... and potentially their only real growth market in NA is people from central and south America, putting a server closer to them will help everyone. The few people who play from Asia (SEA is now officially a bigger population in this game than NA) and the few people who play from EU mean nothing compared to the people from South and Central America.



Guido1212 #6 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 19:54

    Major

  • Players
  • 72862 battles
  • 6,839
  • [CARTL] CARTL
  • Member since:
    06-11-2011

View Postenjineer, on Aug 12 2017 - 18:48, said:

A centralized server should have been what we had from day 1.

 

They were growing at one point in the past, everything they touched turned to gold because they had a solid game which they were improving and were making good decisions.

 

That was 3 years ago, and here we are.



_PM #7 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 19:55

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 15533 battles
  • 216
  • [KANTO] KANTO
  • Member since:
    01-15-2013

View Postotacon237, on Aug 12 2017 - 13:40, said:

 

2. the server will experience more load, we already know how well WG's server's function

 

EU has like 10x our active playerbase and their servers are fine



Striker_70 #8 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 19:57

    Major

  • Players
  • 18915 battles
  • 5,522
  • Member since:
    04-02-2013
They've been planning to consolidate both servers into 1 for at least a year now.  There are more benefits for more players in doing this than there are pitfalls.

Striker_70 #9 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 19:58

    Major

  • Players
  • 18915 battles
  • 5,522
  • Member since:
    04-02-2013

View Post_PM, on Aug 12 2017 - 12:55, said:

EU has like 10x our active playerbase and their servers are fine

 

I've experienced a problem with high server load maybe twice in 4 years.  It's not exactly a problem.

otacon237 #10 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 19:59

    Major

  • Players
  • 23443 battles
  • 4,370
  • [NA-CL] NA-CL
  • Member since:
    01-08-2012

View PostBsan77, on Aug 12 2017 - 18:48, said:

Oh noez my ping will go up 20ms how can I play above 300 WN8??????/s I'm from Oklahoma, so I think it's hilarious to watch people complain. My ping will be better than ever! Ha, take that! :3

 

way to miss the point entirely

View Postenjineer, on Aug 12 2017 - 18:48, said:

A centralized server should have been what we had from day 1.

 

see above

View PostNudnick, on Aug 12 2017 - 18:47, said:

Downsizing is always a financial decision. Eventually if running the NA server costs more than they collect from NA, we'll be on the EU or Asia servers, if we still want to play.

 

​yes but any intelligent (that's probably the issue right there) CEO or really anyone in charge of any kind of business decision would see this as a possible trend that will carry over the other servers eventually. I mean, we all play the same game. unless you're implying NA has some sort of freak demographic issue that affects us more than the other servers, which I doubt. 

 

View Postchzwhz, on Aug 12 2017 - 18:53, said:

The greatest influx of players to NA... and potentially their only real growth market in NA is people from central and south America, putting a server closer to them will help everyone. The few people who play from Asia (SEA is now officially a bigger population in this game than NA) and the few people who play from EU mean nothing compared to the people from South and Central America.

so then you are agreeing with me that they are cutting their losses. I don't agree that central and south America are their only potential growth market. with the exception of possibly Brazil who actually has a decent economy, the rest of that region is very poor. they'll get warm bodies but I doubt they will see more $$$ per capita, probably somewhere on par with the RU cluster. the intelligent choice would be to expand the underutilized but extremely profitable per capita NA market. literally 1 new NA player will equal 5-6 new RU players for income. 



otacon237 #11 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 19:59

    Major

  • Players
  • 23443 battles
  • 4,370
  • [NA-CL] NA-CL
  • Member since:
    01-08-2012

View Post_PM, on Aug 12 2017 - 18:55, said:

EU has like 10x our active playerbase and their servers are fine

 

​1. EU isn't the redheaded rented mule of WG. 

2. False. go watch Foch, QB or Circon. they all experience lag and you can see the turret twitch in almost every video they make. how they react to it varies, but it's there. 


Edited by otacon237, Aug 12 2017 - 20:00.


_PM #12 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 20:01

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 15533 battles
  • 216
  • [KANTO] KANTO
  • Member since:
    01-15-2013

View PostStriker_70, on Aug 12 2017 - 13:58, said:

 

I've experienced a problem with high server load maybe twice in 4 years.  It's not exactly a problem.

 

Thanks for agreeing with me?

indoctrinated #13 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 20:04

    Major

  • Players
  • 20171 battles
  • 2,164
  • Member since:
    05-22-2012
Why not just merge the NA server into EU or RU?

BeanHoleBandit #14 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 20:05

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 14635 battles
  • 1,547
  • Member since:
    12-21-2014
Well I guess it will give MM more tanks to pick from.. Maybe not cause such a bad cancer case with that... Probably more ping.. 

You know who knows..    Guess they are cutting down on cost and maybe i'm hoping MM does a better job with more tanks to pick from and some ppl complain about Que time.. So maybe that goes better as well.. 

I mean I see some good in this..  But there is bad in it too..  I mean in all reality, who knows what these guys are doing. It just feels like the last hump before the downfall.. 

9435 #15 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 20:05

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 146 battles
  • 277
  • Member since:
    10-29-2015

View Postotacon237, on Aug 12 2017 - 19:40, said:

I see a lot of people are excited about this central server and quite frankly, I don't think it's a good thing and I think it needs to be discussed in a sober light

 

1. the majority of the current players, those on the East Coast, will not benefit from this, since i'm guessing the server will move from DC to a more Midwestern location. NA west will benefit, which is all good and well, but from a strictly statistical perspective, the majority of the players will not. 

 

2. the server will experience more load, we already know how well WG's server's function

 

but these are merely "technical" concerns, and not really looking at the big picture. here's what I find personally really troubling.

 

3. the NA server is hemorrhaging players. everyone knows this by now, there's statistics to back it up, if you're going to deny this or claim it's normal, YOU WILL BE IGNORED. WOT-NEWS.com has the relevant figures. there is no denying it. by doing this central server move, WG is ACKNOWLEDGING this situation, indirectly or otherwise, but they don't seem overly concerned since many people would claim the last few patches changed the game for the worse, rather than better. 

 

4. this is not a "fix". this is cutting their losses. too many people are focused on the short term. "Yay we will consolidate our rapidly shrinking playerbase". is that really a good thing? if nothing is done to prevent said shrinking, all this will do is delay the inevitable, possibly even accelerate it (see #2). what actions is WG taking to reverse the loss of players? are they taking any? or is NA just an acceptable loss for them? I know I will not get an official WG response, but I still think it needs to be discussed

 

1.  THE NA East server used to be in Chicago, and no one had an issue then.

 

2.  Look at the EU and RU servers, they have 10 times the load we do and they run fine, so WG has the experience and tech to run large servers (not sure if they will spend the money on the NA/SA market for decent servers).

 

3 & 4.  The issues with WG all started after they moved to Cyprus.  They had the "Big Player Meeting" where they generated the 3 main problems with the game : "Maps, Light tanks being useless (mainly due to the maps) & SPG's".  What happens after that meeting?  WG with all it's brain power comes up with Arty changes, expanding lights to tier 10 and wait "NO MAP UPDATES" or changes.  Funny when all the players said that the MM, SPG's and Lights could all be fixed with better maps, WG in all its brilliance doesn't do a dam thing about the MAPS.  Instead they come up with OP premium tanks, different MM (better than the old but still crap), tier 10 lights nerfs and updates to the current tanks (that weren't needed), different game modes, and no new maps.



spud_tuber #16 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 20:06

    Major

  • Players
  • 42989 battles
  • 4,185
  • Member since:
    08-26-2013
1) assumes facts not in evidence.  How do you know where the majority of the players are? Just because they play on east currently(better mm, most non pub gamemodes taking place there, etc) doesn't say anything about their physical location.

2) If, and I admit it's a big if, WG does the move right, they can hopefully eliminate whatever faulty server equipment was causing some of the east server issues and scale the server to the proper.  Depending who they use as a service provider, the issues with that may be partially resolved as well.  Remember, west server hasn't had nearly as many isp or internal issues as east, so there is evidence wg can do it right at times.

3) hemorrhaging may be an exaggeration(or a case of misreading the data rather than looking at year over year, but you're correct that it is indeed losing players.  Whether that was a mayor consideration in this plan is up for debate.

4) you're right that this is only a short term fix for MM and special modes assuming that player loss continues.  OTOH, there's no way to know if player loss will continue, and if the move fixes the lag/packet loss issues east is currently having(see 2), then it may even help the player population.  As far as what else WGNA is doing to fight player loss, the fairly easy recent marathons, the generous compensation for the chat server issues, the easy ish tank rewards missions, and an attempt at least to renew interest in end game CW don't count?  Or that the main developers have been doing things to improve the new player experience to help with low level retention?

The above is in part at least a devil's advocate position.  I'm neither particularly excited or disturbed by the news at this point.  It has the potential for both good and ill.  I'm mostly taking a wait and see approach, though I am trying to look on the bright side until actual info rather than speculation gives me reason not to.

I_Die_Much #17 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 20:07

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 8232 battles
  • 793
  • Member since:
    12-18-2014

Think they're ready to move onto WoT 2.0. If moving and consolidating the server into a central location will have negative effects to the population. So will a new modern version of WoT. (If it's not yet another project to never get off the ground). 

 

This game flourished before the split. Will it be the demise under a renewed server consolidation? One can only tell. Since I reside in the south east and play on the east; I never gained or lost anything from the split. So I truly don't know the full value of it. But, I think the proof shows that connectivity, whatever that may be didn't have negative results when we just had one server. So, that leaves the burden and fault of decline strictly in WG hands. 



BeanHoleBandit #18 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 20:08

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 14635 battles
  • 1,547
  • Member since:
    12-21-2014

View Post9435, on Aug 12 2017 - 20:05, said:

 

1.  THE NA East server used to be in Chicago, and no one had an issue then.

 

2.  Look at the EU and RU servers, they have 10 times the load we do and they run fine, so WG has the experience and tech to run large servers (not sure if they will spend the money on the NA/SA market for decent servers).

 

3 & 4.  The issues with WG all started after they moved to Cyprus.  They had the "Big Player Meeting" where they generated the 3 main problems with the game : "Maps, Light tanks being useless (mainly due to the maps) & SPG's".  What happens after that meeting?  WG with all it's brain power comes up with Arty changes, expanding lights to tier 10 and wait "NO MAP UPDATES" or changes.  Funny when all the players said that the MM, SPG's and Lights could all be fixed with better maps, WG in all its brilliance doesn't do a dam thing about the MAPS.  Instead they come up with OP premium tanks, different MM (better than the old but still crap), tier 10 lights nerfs and updates to the current tanks (that weren't needed), different game modes, and no new maps.

 

They game up with all those cool game modes you forgot about that no one asked for.. 

The new 30vs30 I love the size of that map.. Just wish it was 15vs15 still..  Let the lights and TD's and arty really do their jobs. I mean 30 tanks on those maps still feel like himmelsdorf with 15 on it.

CapPhrases #19 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 20:10

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 6340 battles
  • 2,049
  • [TXV] TXV
  • Member since:
    03-28-2015

I live midwest so a central server won't hurt me personally but i see how it might affect others.

truth is the game has no real audience over here since the devs only care for the RU server and what they want is seldom what NA or even EU wants. the choices wg is currently making have them pandering more to ru and leaving the rest of us to eat their sloppy seconds when we want something done better.

 



BeanHoleBandit #20 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 20:13

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 14635 battles
  • 1,547
  • Member since:
    12-21-2014

View Postspud_tuber, on Aug 12 2017 - 20:06, said:

As far as what else WGNA is doing to fight player loss, the fairly easy recent marathons, the generous compensation for the chat server issues, the easy ish tank rewards missions, and an attempt at least to renew interest in end game CW don't count? Or that the main developers have been doing things to improve the new player experience to help with low level retention?

The above is in part at least a devil's advocate position. I'm neither particularly excited or disturbed by the news at this point. It has the potential for both good and ill. I'm mostly taking a wait and see approach, though I am trying to look on the bright side until actual info rather than speculation gives me reason not to.

 

The compensations and easy rewards all all the Xp give away's and things.. Is arguably a reason for the increase in bad players at top tiers.. 

So are they really helping with all of this.. Its a mix..  If they didn't do anything would it make a difference.. Eh..  some times a good gesture don't have to be actually giving you something.. As much as real apologies and real feedback and really listening to the players in the first place.. 

Like a kid man or the movie Richy Rich.. The rich kid who got gave anything and everything but all he ever wanted is LOVE.. I mean if I feel you don't give a crap then why am i no matter what u give me.. 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users