[Suggestion] Connery and Emerald Need To Be Merged

I'm all for a merger myself. I've played a bit on a couple Emerald alts and not noticed any problems with performance. I'd really like to not have to build them up from scratch. Connery is pretty quiet these days with very few exceptions and it's getting worse.

When people come back from time to time it's getting hard to get them interested in the game again.

Did you always cry when getting picked on?

In this case you hide behind a mod that will never come instead of even try to make a comeback on the debate at hand. But you know you're wrong on the latency/population issue.

Drama?
Seems your the one being a /report queen.

Asking for Connery to be "fixed" is not going to happen, ever. There is not enough population for them to spend resources and resolve it.
But something tells me since you know it all, you already knew that....

Did I say that Emerald or Connery's population wasn't declining?


Did it?


Find where I said that.

Find it.

Now.


Oh wait, you can't.

What does that have to do with the price of tea in china? You went on this tirade about Freerealms' servers having issues due to having too much going on them.

I stated that I've seen the server Connery (specifically after its merger with Helios) have more than it would IF it was merged with Emerald. And you know what? It had no issues. But like I said, I'm pretty sure you knew that. And I'll wager that server performance isn't your real concern. That's why I've been calling you out.

The purpose of that statement was to emphasize how PS2 servers do not handle high population well. It was completely relevant. And not only did you completely miss the point, you also completely misinterpreted it.



And how on Vanu's green Araxius could my desire to have Emerald and Connery stay separate servers, be racist or otherwise nefarious in nature?


You know what? Either you are insane, or trolling. That must be the explanation. Good day sir. Ignored.

Jesus **** you're stupid.

Ignoring latency issues when moving from one server to another in the same continent, I see people that play Emerald with over 500ms that warp around like crazy, desync, etc. I'm sure people like that exist on Connery too (nobody really cares, since Connery is primarily just ****ters anyway).

Say there are 50 lagwizards on Emerald, and 25 on Connery. If you merge the servers, you get a 50% increase in lagwizards! Holy ****, math! Remember, the additional 40ms probably isn't the cause of this for most people, but because it's someone playing from a different continent or on ****** hardware that can't accurately update client to server information through hardware issues, ping, whatever. Completely unaffected by server population!

Oh, but the TWIST! If a users machine is bad enough, then high pop counts in zones can bottleneck performance, which can lead to warping, desync, or even possibly crashing. For the majority of users, this isn't a problem, but for some, it is. But hey, **** minorities, right?

You're an ******* hiding behind your own ******* prejudices and stupidity. Go away.

I'm stupid? You're suggesting there is a 500ms difference between Connery and Emerald, not me. So what are you?

You all are making it out like Connery and Emerald are on two different continents. I will say it again, myself, along with many others have played on the West Coast server for three years (started on Genudine which merged to Helios, which merged to Connery). Never had a latency issue. And I can't get anymore east in the US than I currently am without living on a boat.

Fun fact.. I can play on EU servers too without a hitch. But EU to NA is really never an issue. Your issue is those in the pacific and those in Asia that play on Connery. I've personally haven't seen very much in the way of latency induced issues with these guys. And then there's the servicemembers stationed over there that invariably would like to play with their friends and such back home. I'm a bit appalled that you all would refuse to play with these individuals, simply because you either hate, dislike, or misunderstand the people of the region they are currently in.

I've also seen the server have THREE times the population it has now. You know what big and evil thing happens? Queue on Indar. Omg that's so frightening! Well occassionally if the majority is fighting there, and if there is an alert, and if there is a possibility of someone locking it, and if it is primetime, we'll see a 1-5 person queue there now. I guess this would happen more frequently. But the plus side is that 'other' continent will actually have a fight or two and not be dead.

Worse case scenario, the dynamic continent lock kicks in and opens three continents at a time. I doubt the servers combined have that number of people. Despite EACH having it on their own in the past. But sorry to say, they don't have it now.

And then the bad hardware issue. Wow.. and I'm accused of hurting the minority. And that just seems odd. What the hell does hardware have to do with region? As if everyone that lives in your town has great hardware? Is that what you are seriously saying?

I call out four people, yet you call out literally hundreds, yet I'm the bad guy? Give me a break forumside, you all don't have your act together.

We still do have those epic battles, you need to look harder.

Ping really matters in Planetside 2, it gets laggy VERY quick.

There was one yesterday on Connery on Esamir. A buddy of mine was leading one of the platoons. It lasted literally 6 hours between the same three bases. Infantry vs Infantry, Vehicle vs Vehicle, Infantry vs Vehicle, it had it all.. well very little air compared to what you'd expect.

However, the point the OP is making is.. well in yesterday's case that was the only fight going on. There was a smaller platoon vs platoon scale fight (48-96), and that was about it. Surprisingly Indar was dead. TR wasn't even present, and like a few squads from both VS and NC just ghost capped raced it.

Merger would cause more than one of these fights per continent, down at least two lattice lanes. In addition it would be happening on more than one continent.

Ping issues are usually those issues with air rubber banding and delayed events. Usually.

Yesterday a few of my squadmates reported delays. Like kill messages popping up while someone they were shooting at was still alive. Reloads going off late, medikits taking a few seconds to go off. One is located near the great lakes, another is just north of CA. And ironically I (being the furthest away) had none of those issues.

They found that by rebooting their computer fixed the issue.

Now one thing that everyone has seen, experienced, and has a gripe about is the rendering 'issue'. How PS2 works (and I assume you probably know this, but others may not) is it will render everything around you to a certain radius. This is so the server does NOT have to report EVERY person on the continent to your client. It keeps track of everyone, then when they get within the threshold, it starts relaying them pertinent info.

This is why past a certain range, you cannot deal damage nor be affected by things past that range.

Why is this a big deal? When the number of players gets past a threshold in close proximity. The server lowers the radius. It does this dynamically. When people don't render past 40m, it is NOT a bug. Its a necessary evil. This is the common complaint players have with higher populations.

What they fail to realize (or mention, for those in the know) is that this does NOT happen continent wide. If 300 players are in a 100m area around the Crown on Indar, and don't render unless under 30m. The same does NOT happen at Scarred Mesa Skydock if there is only a 12v12 fight going on there. In the latter case, infantry render to 300m (350ish) as normal. They don't experience lag or delays players might see at the former.

So the biggest fear is the 300+ fights happening across a continent. Well.. the numbers don't add up. With both servers active, and assuming a merge. A 2000-2800 population on a server amounts to a 700-900 players per faction. Set queue at 500 (which I think it already is) per faction, and you will only ever experience one or two of 300+ fights per continent.

This is assuming we still have the double lock we currently have. If the numbers are enough to trigger the locking of only a single continent. Then we see similar fights to what we do now. Except over two continents with a extra continent experiencing a ghost cap.

Just an FYI, when you report someone for a 'personal attack' and then do one yourself, you kinda tell on yourself lol. Congrats!

Errr....Am I calling you a bigot? No. Am I calling you racist? No. Am I calling you prejudiced? No.

This is a meme.

Meme:

Memes are not personal. This is being used to summarize the current situation of this thread. If I receive 1 more ill-thought response from you I'll just take out the /ignore and continue to make posts that appear to be very irritating to you and no one will be there to hear you whine.

/thread.

I don't think you understand how ignore works. But feel free to use it. Do us both a favor.

The game is done. Might as well have one final merger to let those who still want epic battles 2013-esque to happen. If you don't at least have a 2500K CPU at the end of 2015, well... that's kind of your issue. A SB-based build which will run PS2 well is so dirt cheap used on Ebay now.

If the server could be placed in a city like Dallas, that'd be ideal for all of NA.

Congrats, you have now joined the dubious ranks of the Internet Kooks Klub. You are a full Nutbar Member. You are clearly projecting your own real life racism, bigotry and stunning stupidity onto people in a game. Your sad little turn at being a SJW in a game is laughable. No one is going to look at you the same again.



Yeah, so not playing in the polluted end of the gene-pool with you Pal.

So which is it? Bigotry, or Naivety?

Or are you going to do like the others and hide behind memes and moderators that never come?

Learn to spell.

So you REALLY believe that the reason they're actually against it is bigotry? What kind? Since you're one of /those/ types, I assume you're accusing them of being racist? On what grounds? Because it's the worst thing you can label them as, make your opposition into 'bad' people so your position is the 'obvious' answer?

I mean ****, I was against the Waterson/Mattherson merger not because I thought we didn't need it, but because I ******* hated Mattherson and everyone on it. Simple. Maybe Connery feels the same way - after all Emerald inherited all those tryhard ****wits, perhaps to them we look like ********.