Scout Archive
Thread: A concerning post by TH in Weekly Round table
So I was going through the current weekly round table post by TH. A few people asked about the problem of creature and lair spawning on planets. The random ones not the mission ones. The orange is his responce, and the green is mine to his. What do you guys think? What gives?
It means that there are a lot of people on the planet. The more people there are, the less random spawns there are. These are adjustments the server makes automatically. If you are running shy of random spawns, you should go get a mission. The terminals will spawn additional lairs when this type of loading occurs...
WOOOWWWW, you did not just say that TH. For one thing, if there are more people on a planet, there should be MORE random spawns. You know, so those more people can actually encounter them? Since when did SOE take this stance on this issue? It's different then it was on this same issue before. So what about us scouts and rangers? What about when we take missions from the Explorer terminials, THAT DON'T SPAWN LAIRS? What about us that just like to wander about a planet, killing what we find?
Please come up with a different answer.
I have not visited the Creature Handler or Bio-Engineer boards but I bet this went over real well there.
Squidwalker wrote:
So I was going through the current weekly round table post by TH. A few people asked about the problem of creature and lair spawning on planets. The random ones not the mission ones. The orange is his responce, and the green is mine to his. What do you guys think? What gives?
It means that there are a lot of people on the planet. The more people there are, the less random spawns there are. These are adjustments the server makes automatically. If you are running shy of random spawns, you should go get a mission. The terminals will spawn additional lairs when this type of loading occurs...
WOOOWWWW, you did not just say that TH. For one thing, if there are more people on a planet, there should be MORE random spawns. You know, so those more people can actually encounter them? Since when did SOE take this stance on this issue? It's different then it was on this same issue before. So what about us scouts and rangers? What about when we take missions from the Explorer terminials, THAT DON'T SPAWN LAIRS? What about us that just like to wander about a planet, killing what we find?
Please come up with a different answer.
While it doesn't make sense from a gamer perspective think at it from a game performance standpoint. Here's the reason for it: imagine Coronet the way it is now. There's a lot of people in that area and things get slow when all those people get together. Now by your rationale, if the devs added more spawns to an area as the player population increased imagine how much increased traffic you would have and how it would kill performance; if for every player that entered Coronet they would spawn 3 NPCs. Think of it in that microcism. It doesn't make sense for them to INCREASE spawns as the traffic increases on a server. It would be perforance suicide.
RozhlokLightningskull wrote:
Squidwalker wrote:
So I was going through the current weekly round table post by TH. A few people asked about the problem of creature and lair spawning on planets. The random ones not the mission ones. The orange is his responce, and the green is mine to his. What do you guys think? What gives?
It means that there are a lot of people on the planet. The more people there are, the less random spawns there are. These are adjustments the server makes automatically. If you are running shy of random spawns, you should go get a mission. The terminals will spawn additional lairs when this type of loading occurs...
WOOOWWWW, you did not just say that TH. For one thing, if there are more people on a planet, there should be MORE random spawns. You know, so those more people can actually encounter them? Since when did SOE take this stance on this issue? It's different then it was on this same issue before. So what about us scouts and rangers? What about when we take missions from the Explorer terminials, THAT DON'T SPAWN LAIRS? What about us that just like to wander about a planet, killing what we find?
Please come up with a different answer.
While it doesn't make sense from a gamer perspective think at it from a game performance standpoint. Here's the reason for it: imagine Coronet the way it is now. There's a lot of people in that area and things get slow when all those people get together. Now by your rationale, if the devs added more spawns to an area as the player population increased imagine how much increased traffic you would have and how it would kill performance; if for every player that entered Coronet they would spawn 3 NPCs. Think of it in that microcism. It doesn't make sense for them to INCREASE spawns as the traffic increases on a server. It would be perforance suicide.
So with your logic, if there is no one on the planet at all, it will be very full of spawns and things to kill. Just no one to hunt them. Does that make sence to you still? The thing they say that the spawns populate around the masses, and thusly around the city is still messed. If I wanted to hunt around a city, I would just get missions. The point is, if I wander across a planet, through deep wilderness, not in view of any cities, player or otherwise, or even houses, I should see some creatures. I should see some dangerous nasty things on the advanced planets, thus making it more exciting to wander planets.
RozhlokLightningskull wrote:
Squidwalker wrote:
So with your logic, if there is no one on the planet at all, it will be very full of spawns and things to kill. Just no one to hunt them. Does that make sence to you still? The thing they say that the spawns populate around the masses, and thusly around the city is still messed. If I wanted to hunt around a city, I would just get missions. The point is, if I wander across a planet, through deep wilderness, not in view of any cities, player or otherwise, or even houses, I should see some creatures. I should see some dangerous nasty things on the advanced planets, thus making it more exciting to wander planets.
With my logic withbetween 0 andXon the planet there would be maxium dynamic spawns. As we go over X and approach Y the spawns would descrease on a linear scale in order to balance the server load that is created with added player traffic.
I'm not arguing with you, your point its valid, from a player perspective. But, try and see the performance side of it and look at the bigger picture. Also, keep in mind we are talking dynamic spawns. With more PCs on a planet the less room you have for dynamic spawns. That's the way you have to manage it unfortunately. Something has to go. What do you suggest the devs do? Limit the players? Start deleting harvesters? Houses? City Halls? Whole player cities?
The solution is not to change the logic, but, to add better faster hardware and write more optimized code so you can increase the value of X and the maxium dynamic spawns. This gives the same desired effect, without backing yourself into a corner.
That's my answer.I do understand the whole limits of technology, believe me, I work in the field and have to explain it all the time to people that want everything to happen just how they want it to, yesterday. But they should have anticpated this knowing their code, knowing the limits of hardware, and knowing this game could get this big if not bigger. I mean it surpassed EQ for registered accounts in its first 3 months.
Being a ranger, I have no need for cities really. I don't like them, and I didn't like the idea of player cities before they launched it, and like it much less now they are here. I think they changed the game for the worse not the better. At many different levels. This is just MHO though. They did at least cut off building of structures on the advanced planets. Barely, but they did thankfully. I think Dantooine should have added to the list, if not at least given a reduced number of aloud structures and cities then normal. And throw Lok into that category too. All others are normally populated planets with beings and societies, and cities. There are not enough "uncrowded" planets in this game.
Squidwalker wrote:
So with your logic, if there is no one on the planet at all, it will be very full of spawns and things to kill. Just no one to hunt them. Does that make sence to you still? The thing they say that the spawns populate around the masses, and thusly around the city is still messed. If I wanted to hunt around a city, I would just get missions. The point is, if I wander across a planet, through deep wilderness, not in view of any cities, player or otherwise, or even houses, I should see some creatures. I should see some dangerous nasty things on the advanced planets, thus making it more exciting to wander planets.
With my logic withbetween 0 andXon the planet there would be maxium dynamic spawns. As we go over X and approach Y the spawns would descrease on a linear scale in order to balance the server load that is created with added player traffic.
I'm not arguing with you, your point its valid, from a player perspective. But, try and see the performance side of it and look at the bigger picture. Also, keep in mind we are talking dynamic spawns. With more PCs on a planet the less room you have for dynamic spawns. That's the way you have to manage it unfortunately. Something has to go. What do you suggest the devs do? Limit the players? Start deleting harvesters? Houses? City Halls? Whole player cities?
The solution is not to change the logic, but, to add better faster hardware and write more optimized code so you can increase the value of X and the maxium dynamic spawns. This gives the same desired effect, without backing yourself into a corner.
Squidwalker wrote:
That's my answer.I do understand the whole limits of technology, believe me, I work in the field and have to explain it all the time to people that want everything to happen just how they want it to, yesterday. But they should have anticpated this knowing their code, knowing the limits of hardware, and knowing this game could get this big if not bigger. I mean it surpassed EQ for registered accounts in its first 3 months.
Being a ranger, I have no need for cities really. I don't like them, and I didn't like the idea of player cities before they launched it, and like it much less now they are here. I think they changed the game for the worse not the better. At many different levels. This is just MHO though. They did at least cut off building of structures on the advanced planets. Barely, but they did thankfully. I think Dantooine should have added to the list, if not at least given a reduced number of aloud structures and cities then normal. And throw Lok into that category too. All others are normally populated planets with beings and societies, and cities. There are not enough "uncrowded" planets in this game.
Hey you and me both. Today I had to explain to the general manager why its a bad idea to have plug and play WiFi (broadcasting of AP SSID and no WEP) Internet connectivity for our customers in our office. Lucky I can fall back on the old, "Hey I agree with you (not), but, that's the corportate policy." 
I agree with you about player cities as well. But, that's a Ranger and a Bounty Hunter's opinion. We don't get much from a player city. But, crafters can get bounses for crafting in certain types of cities. Other players can get mission payout bonuses for running missions from certain player cities.
So unfortunately, removing player cities from Dant and Lok isn't going to happen. I receive no benefit from them and I think they are more of a hassle than anything else. And the Master Scout in me doesn't like the ubran sprawl. Heck most of the *good* crafters always have one shop in their PC, but, their *real* shop is a kilometer outside Coronet. The only time I've ever been happy to see a player city was when my bike needed repairs and I did a /find garage and could find a player placed garage. In that case I'm happy to see one.
I think that is just a tinsy bit too few spawns. Call me strange.
Squidwalker wrote:
So I was going through the current weekly round table post by TH. A few people asked about the problem of creature and lair spawning on planets. The random ones not the mission ones. The orange is his responce, and the green is mine to his. What do you guys think? What gives?
It means that there are a lot of people on the planet. The more people there are, the less random spawns there are. These are adjustments the server makes automatically. If you are running shy of random spawns, you should go get a mission. The terminals will spawn additional lairs when this type of loading occurs...
WOOOWWWW, you did not just say that TH. For one thing, if there are more people on a planet, there should be MORE random spawns. You know, so those more people can actually encounter them? Since when did SOE take this stance on this issue? It's different then it was on this same issue before. So what about us scouts and rangers? What about when we take missions from the Explorer terminials, THAT DON'T SPAWN LAIRS? What about us that just like to wander about a planet, killing what we find?
Please come up with a different answer.
Squid,
This is a dbase question - if more people = more random spawns it would also = massive lag.
Now, granted, there are some issues on some planets more than others, but that's the situation. Don't kill the messenger...this is how the game works.
B
Well Delta I understand the issues of DB and technology limits. But as I said, this is the opposite type of responce from the Devs in the past. Not to mention, as you said, some planets are way worse. Like Dant is a waiste land, and has been that way since before player cities. We complained about Dant back then, and it's still an issue.
Now if it's DB problems, then how come these problems are game wide and not server wide? Each server has their own DB and different players with different DB and DB objects and numbers. But yet, everyone across all galaxies complains of this problem, and specifically about Dant itself. Seems fishy to me. No offence to the Mon Cal.
Squid,
I'm a politician, not a game designer.
I know how to drive my car, but when I look under the hood, I'm lost.
All I know is what the Devs tell me, and from what I remember hearing from them in the past, this isn't contrary...the more players the fewer spawns. And I believe (and I may be wrong) that each planet is run off of a seperate server that's tied in to all of the galaxy servers. At least, they said in the past that they upgraded the Dantooine server hardware, so that's what I assumed.
Sorry I can't be more of assistance to you on this one.
B