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

[Bicorps]

If there is multiple server I wont play for more than 2 month for sure. Server gonna get empty 2x faster and there gonna be no point to play. There still gonna be lagswitching people anyways.

I never understood why people cant deal with the ping. Just get good.

 

[cwall]

Making melee less twitchy to compensate for ping is obviously ticking off many higher twitch melees. But magic was traditionally more hitscan based and dominators/tamers traditionally took very little skill at all.

People looking at those roles don't even want the twitch skill of them raised. That's not to say some of the lower skills roles won't benefit from being higher skill, but there are other ways to make those roles more engaging. Even if everyone's ping is 0 there should be ping forgiving roles in the game because they appeal to the many older/lower reflex players who had viable roles in MO1.

I don't think latency compensation should be a factor in design, in general. I don't really care how fast/twitchy combat is in general - I care about it feeling intuitive to play.

 

[[AF]Tyrone]

Yeah, I'm not going to be playing melee.

Ping neutral

regret

There's no such thing as ping neutral. There are roles which high ping players can compete more easily with the low ping, but the low ping always has a large advantage over you. Generally the mounted with 5 ping beats the mounted with 160.

Something you should know though Kaemik. The people telling you that MC/MA/Mage work well with high ping are leaving out an important fact. Those roles require you to be good at abusing prediction and being a laggy boy, they are enabling roles, and they require you to have above average game sense.

Are you 2100+ in WoW arena? 3K in dota/diamond in league? Do you have 20 people competently playing melee in your group?

MC/MA/Mage/Hybrid are roles for good players. I wouldn't say "im not gona play melee" until you actually prove you can play another role well, because you're probably gona be out performed by some kid who has been a WoW glad healer since WoD.

regret

I've been around for a lot of server splits. Darkfall, Life is feudal, etc. The only people who regret splits are europeans, because they prefer to farm NA players with high ping.

 

[Handsome Young Man]

The problem with continents having different servers, Myrland is always going to be the superior continent in terms of all-round PvP and resource acquisition, this still makes it plenty 'unfair' in my eyes for EU players to once again have the full reigns in Myrland - Just saying, if you told US players that we get Sard. I'd actually laugh.

A LOT of players have had to deal with these ping problems bar EU players, and again we're going the route of EU players getting preferential treatment because of it.

I don't see why my experience, among many others, should honestly suffer because of such. I just want a fun, un-problematic experience from a technical point of view. Why do I need to wait 'unknown years' ahead of time for a 'potential' internet solution that may or may not come.

And again, if the game is good - then it will attract people, I don't think using the argument that two servers will kill the population - it's just no true when you look elsewhere for inspiration. If I need to name games, I will. But lets be honest you already know them.

If the game isn't good, then it wont have a population regardless; and ping differences paired with pseudo-fixes such as slower combat and purposeful delays doesn't make it good (In my opinion). As it hinders the potential of one of the fundamental parts of combat.

Ping issues also present tons of stuff that is super SUPER bad.

 

[Kaemik]

I don't think latency compensation should be a factor in design, in general. I don't really care how fast/twitchy combat is in general - I care about it feeling intuitive to play.

High reflex vs. low reflex is essentially the same concept as latency forgiving builds.

I'd say it's accurate to say in about 100% of situations that a difference of 100-200ping will have a significant detrimental effect on your ability to play a build that means it's a high reflex build, and if it doesn't, that's a low reflex build.

Since the difference between a high ping and low ping player is going to be reaction speed. Like if you clone the same guy and have them fight each other with a 0 and 150 ping the clone with 150 ping will react to everything slightly slower.

He'll get absolutely stomped in a round of Call of Duty. He'd have no notable disadvantage in a chess match. So if your build's skills come from things like mana management, positioning, ability selection, and situational awareness your disadvantage would be very unpronounced either as a lower reflex player or as a low ping player. No real functional difference between those two things.

 

[Handsome Young Man]

I don't think latency compensation should be a factor in design, in general. I don't really care how fast/twitchy combat is in general - I care about it feeling intuitive to play.

This guy knows what's up.

 

[[AF]Tyrone]

because they appeal to the many older/lower reflex players who had viable roles in MO1.

This is a meme, but that role is melee. It definitely is not magic or mounted combat.

This video is the perfect demonstration of how you need to play those "lower reflex" roles, and this guy will be your opponent. Good luck.

 

[cwall]

High reflex vs. low reflex is essentially the same concept as latency forgiving builds.

I'd say it's accurate to say in about 100% of situations that a difference of 100-200ping will have a significant detrimental effect on your ability to play a build that means it's a high reflex build, and if it doesn't, that's a low reflex build.

Since the difference between a high ping and low ping player is going to be reaction speed. Like if you clone the same guy and have them fight each other with a 0 and 150 ping the clone with 150 ping will react to everything slightly slower.

He'll get absolutely stomped in a round of Call of Duty. He'd have no notable disadvantage in a chess match. So if your build's skills come from things like mana management, positioning, ability selection, and situational awareness your disadvantage would be very unpronounced either as a lower reflex player or as a low ping player. No real functional difference between those two things.

Sure, those things are all true. I just don't think any archetypes should be designed in a way to compensate for latency. Eliminating latency issues and then designing should be feasible. I don't see why melee combat needs to be balanced/designed around reflexes.

 

[Handsome Young Man]

If there is multiple server I wont play for more than 2 month for sure. Server gonna get empty 2x faster and there gonna be no point to play. There still gonna be lagswitching people anyways.

I never understood why people cant deal with the ping. Just get good.

lol.

 

[Vagrant]

from a 320 ping in Australia standpoint, I'm not going to care if it's EU or NA,
it may well depend on population but dividing servers is already going to divide many guilds and groups.
fortunately i'm also a crap pvp'er and would just prefer a populated server

 

[Javelin]

It's a double edged sword. I honestly can't vote on either side with 100% confidence.
[/Q

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.

I agree totally if you make a good game experience the players will come. Hedging your bets and designing expecting a small population sets yourself up to fail when it means dumbing down what otherwise could be a kickass game.

 

[Handsome Young Man]

 

[Handsome Young Man]

BTW these videos, I'm just looking up on the fly. It's not like I have them in my back pocket or anything.

All good examples of what 'one server' does to people.

You get stuck on peoples screens, run faster / slower, lag out, teleport, etc. If you think it's not going to happen on MO2 (Even though it already does) then you're craaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaazy.

 

[Kaemik]

Making EU and NA server continents would be a good idea. Those continents absolutely should not be Myrland and Sarduuca if it's done that way though.

Just make a continent to the east of Myrland that is functionally equivalent in terms of landmass and resource value. Both continents should have the resources needed to make what they need on their own but there should be a few regional differences in resources to promote trade.

I realize there is some existing lore this may contradict with. Overwrite it. We don't even have more than a page worth of description on Alvarins or Ohgmir. Like there is a disappointingly low amount of lore for MO2 as the sequel for a game that has existed for years. You can adapt the lore to make it work.

 

[Handsome Young Man]

Making EU and NA server continents would be a good idea. Those continents absolutely should not be Myrland and Sarduuca if it's done that way though.

Just make a continent to the east of Myrland that is functionally equivalent in terms of landmass and resource value. Both continents should have the resources needed to make what they need on their own but there should be a few regional differences in resources to promote trade.

I realize there is some existing lore this may contradict with. Overwrite it. We don't even have more than a page worth of description on Alvarins or Ohgmir. Like there is a disappointingly low amount of lore for MO2 as the sequel for a game that has existed for years. You can adapt the lore to make it work.

I'd be okay with that TBH.

 

[Kaemik]

I'd be okay with that TBH.

It's settled then. When HYM and I agree on something that means it's an acceptable compromise the whole community will get behind. Take note SV. XD

 

[Handsome Young Man]

I just genuinely don't see myself as an unreasonable person.

Something makes sense, I agree with it.

Something doesn't make sense, I don't agree with it.

I want a smooth gaming experience that is fun, engaging, and skill-based.

 

[Kaemik]

I've noticed you've given constructive feedback on a few of my recent posts and I do appreciate the efforts to give my ideas a fair shake even if we disagree on a hell of a lot. I also think what I said is accurate though. When we both agree on something it's a good indication to SV that it would enjoy wide community support.

 

[RaptorBlackz]

from a 320 ping in Australia standpoint, I'm not going to care if it's EU or NA,
it may well depend on population but dividing servers is already going to divide many guilds and groups.
fortunately i'm also a crap pvp'er and would just prefer a populated server

As an Australian i and many others would prefer a NA server as we like our PVP, Our estimated ping would be the following:
150ping US-West, 190-220 - Central America, 250-280 US-East*.
In comparison to the 300-400MS we pull from the EU servers, I'd rather a NA server.

Pretty sure the population of Mortal Online is more NA based anyway so why not cater to your customers.
Now imagine if the server was US-West/US-Central, Aussie players and European players will have an almost identical playing field in ping disparity.

 

[Handsome Young Man]

As an Australian i and many others would prefer a NA server as we like our PVP, Our estimated ping would be the following:
150ping US-West, 190-220 - Central America, 250-280 US-West.
In comparison to the 300-400MS we pull from the EU servers, I'd rather a NA server.

Pretty sure the population of Mortal Online is more NA based anyway so why not cater to your customers.
Now imagine if the server was US-West/US-Central, Aussie players and European players will have an almost identical playing field in ping disparity.

Facts honestly.