Jump to content

Turrets 2: Electric Boogaloo (Or, what are we actually doing?)


TheRightHand
Message added by Jerryn

You can find the Technical reasons for the change here:

 

Recommended Posts

I read a suggestion somewhere that plantx could apply a flat % based damage DoT and I think that could be great, as long as it does not stack. With a higher projectile speed, that would encourage people to limit plantx use due to only needing a few placed strategically.

 

Also, I STRONGLY suggest that people ignore ThickFredoms "turret testing" video, he has no idea what he is talking about. I also suspect that the pvp players he recruited for the test were liars or just too excited to be on a youtube video to care about the legitimacy of the testing they did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 402
  • Created
  • Last Reply
6 hours ago, Jerryn said:

If you post these, please be kind and list the creator of the video.  I personal don't click on blind links as they may take me to someone I choose to not support because of their style, habit of click baiting, and/or just getting things wrong.  And, there are others like me that feel the same way. 

Thanks.

Yep. ThickFreedom is well known for his exaggerated, click-bait titles. I could immediately tell it was him just by looking at the thumb nail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Arkton said:

The Tek Vault could possibly also store DNA samples of prized parent Dino's, also in limited amounts. Maybe sacrifice an egg for the 'store DNA' action (using stats on the egg), and retrieve using a surrogate Egg to fuse to. 

So in short, just put one of your fertilised eggs in its normal slots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Volunteer Moderator
14 hours ago, Arkton said:

How about introducing something like a Tek Vault, limited to 1 per tribe.

Unfortunately, everything that is per-tribe limited ends up being heavily abused by alt accounts/characters to bypass said limits. Just take in example the per-tribe tame limit on PvE servers...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Dylan1602 said:

So in short, just put one of your fertilised eggs in its normal slots.

Yes, except it would be a DNA "save" which wouldn't have a spoil timer like an egg, and could have a cool new graphic icon. 

5 hours ago, invincibleqc said:

Unfortunately, everything that is per-tribe limited ends up being heavily abused by alt accounts/characters to bypass said limits. Just take in example the per-tribe tame limit on PvE servers...

Yes that's always a challenge.  But the benefit would be that a raided tribe wouldn't have to go back to start with nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole turret mode discussion where dinos could be left on aggressive and not be kited away has but one glaring flaw that, after reading 31 pages of comments, to my surprise was never mentioned..... If something like this was added where dinos aggressively defended a defined area, players could still just sit just outside of the area and shoot the dinos to death in relative safety..... which is a lot easier then being able to life dinos as it is now.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Supaciv said:

The whole turret mode discussion where dinos could be left on aggressive and not be kited away has but one glaring flaw that, after reading 31 pages of comments, to my surprise was never mentioned..... If something like this was added where dinos aggressively defended a defined area, players could still just sit just outside of the area and shoot the dinos to death in relative safety..... which is a lot easier then being able to life dinos as it is now.....

Not really, though, not if you are clever. Build a pen where the dino stands, he only comes out when aggro'd, making him impossible to snipe without first luring him out. Once the threat is gone he goes back to the specific spot, in the pen and protected from sniper fire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really, though, not if you are clever. Build a pen where the dino stands, he only comes out when aggro'd, making him impossible to snipe without first luring him out. Once the threat is gone he goes back to the specific spot, in the pen and protected from sniper fire.
Of course the dino is in a pen, but that just requires some c4 to take care Of, then kite to dino chase limit, then proceed to kill with compound bow out of range of dino lol
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Supaciv said:

Of course the dino is in a pen, but that just requires some c4 to take care Of, then kite to dino chase limit, then proceed to kill with compound bow out of range of dino lol

The pen itself is covered by turrets. The dino is in ADDITION to the turrets, not by itself. And you can't be out of range of the dino and still have it at limit, once you are out of range it returns to the pen. If you are in range it will attack you, but it won't just stand there. This is all, of course, hypothetical, but the flaws you mentioned wouldn't exist as suggested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Glerian said:

The pen itself is covered by turrets. The dino is in ADDITION to the turrets, not by itself. And you can't be out of range of the dino and still have it at limit, once you are out of range it returns to the pen. If you are in range it will attack you, but it won't just stand there. This is all, of course, hypothetical, but the flaws you mentioned wouldn't exist as suggested.

That would also introduce a new type of griefing - aggro dinos in that pen and leave and let owners spend several minutes trying to sort them out...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait, so what you're telling me is that you're running 3 70 player servers per box with only 64 gigs of RAM?
I'm clearly not the expert here, that's you guys. Curious though, that based on my servers, I see each server instance requiring about 5 gigs idol, and between 0.5 to 1 gig additional RAM PER PLAYER to keep things running smoothly. That puts the sweet spot around 64 gigs per server instance for 70 slot caps.
Perhaps this is because I'm running Windows servers, but I honestly can't see Linux cutting the RAM use by 66%
Could you explain this? How are you getting away with so little RAM?
Ram is your concern here? How about the game being coded with a usless engine that cant utililize all of the threads the 8 core processors have to offer. Its not the turrets or the plant x or dinos that is causeing an issue, its the coding overworking the processors, now theyvare trying to put a bandade on that.

Plain and simple, this game was NOT ready for retail!

WC- Jeremy Stieglitz, Jesse Rapczak and Doug Kennedy... this game is a great concept but its time to pull your heads out of your asses and stop working on anything "new".
Stop trying to release new dlcs, no more new mods, ect..

Take all of your employees and start rebuilding the game from the ground up, fix your coding, use a better engine that can utilize the servers, stop making excusses and just be honest with us. Your base game isnt done and you have 1 dlc and 2 free maps that are still broke with coding errors and now there's another dlc coming out that so many people dont care about now with this major game change...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

GOOD EVENING, 

Why have you guys not done this patch before the new servers came out so you didn't waist everyone's time. Now we have to rebuild our bases and defenses etc. which can take a long time to do.  Also wouldn't it make more sense to have each server running 1 instance of the game at a time instead of 3. Also i thought this game wasn't in beta anymore do to the official release so this game changing update should have happened in beta. 

Whats to stop wildcard from wasting everyone's time again a month or two from now. Find some new excuse for lag and not address the issue of wildcard doesn't want to spend the money on better servers aswell as having multiple servers running on 1 box.

Also an official server that ive played on that has no big bases maybe a total of 1k turrets on the entire server all spread out reached 300 ping when it hit 60 players not even capped. Why not drop your player limit on your crap game until you spend the money to fix the issues.

IM VERY SURE THAT IF THIS GAME WAS SUBSCRIPTION BASED THEY WOULDN'T BE DOING THIS CRAP. WILDCARD LIKES MONEY!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/24/2017 at 2:11 AM, Jdws07 said:

Ram is your concern here? How about the game being coded with a usless engine that cant utililize all of the threads the 8 core processors have to offer. Its not the turrets or the plant x or dinos that is causeing an issue, its the coding overworking the processors, now theyvare trying to put a bandade on that.

Plain and simple, this game was NOT ready for retail!

WC- Jeremy Stieglitz, Jesse Rapczak and Doug Kennedy... this game is a great concept but its time to pull your heads out of your asses and stop working on anything "new".
Stop trying to release new dlcs, no more new mods, ect..

Take all of your employees and start rebuilding the game from the ground up, fix your coding, use a better engine that can utilize the servers, stop making excusses and just be honest with us. Your base game isnt done and you have 1 dlc and 2 free maps that are still broke with coding errors and now there's another dlc coming out that so many people dont care about now with this major game change...

Umm... What are you talking about? Unreal is a great game engine, not perfect, but very popular and respected.

FYI, You actually want servers to limit their core use so that you can run multiple instances on one machine without them competing for cores.

Also, rebuild from the ground up, said no Dev ever... It's just not financially, or timeline viable at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HalfSlabBacon said:

Umm... What are you talking about? Unreal is a great game engine, not perfect, but very popular and respected.

FYI, You actually want servers to limit their core use so that you can run multiple instances on one machine without them competing for cores.

Also, rebuild from the ground up, said no Dev ever... It's just not financially, or timeline viable at all.

Unreal Engine is popular, yes. It shines best when used for singleplayer games or session-based games. But it has its share of problems when it comes to creating persistent world MMO games - poopy poor netcode and lack of multithreading which results in a crappy performance on both client and server if/when there are many (moving)objects and effects on the screen to render, track and broadcast to all involved players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, HalfSlabBacon said:

Umm... What are you talking about? Unreal is a great game engine, not perfect, but very popular and respected.

FYI, You actually want servers to limit their core use so that you can run multiple instances on one machine without them competing for cores.

Also, rebuild from the ground up, said no Dev ever... It's just not financially, or timeline viable at all.

 

3 hours ago, DarthaNyan said:

Unreal Engine is popular, yes. It shines best when used for singleplayer games or session-based games. But it has its share of problems when it comes to creating persistent world MMO games - poopy poor netcode and lack of multithreading which results in a crappy performance on both client and server if/when there are many (moving)objects and effects on the screen to render, track and broadcast to all involved players.

All this technical talk about cores, multithreading and net code. You're thinking far to far into this. It's simple.

Just unplug the potato and plug it back in again. 

Problem solved.

You're welcome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/22/2017 at 11:22 AM, Jerryn said:

and/or just getting things wrong.  And, there are others like me that feel the same way. 

Thanks.

 

In what way did he get it "Wrong" do tell. if I KNOW I can penetrate 100 turrets, no matter HOW you place them, and I don't PvP much at ALL do share your side and show me something you can't EASY demolish

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Jatheish unpinned and unfeatured this topic

I just want to say thank you for the clarity, and I love what you guys are doing to help this community. From the bottom of my heart, I genuinely appreciate you guys working so hard to solve this conundrum that has been on everyone's minds.

And to the PvP community who have spent so much time voicing their opinions/concerns, I say a job well done to you all as well. This is what happens when we all come together and I raptoring love it! <3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, DarthaNyan said:

Unreal Engine is popular, yes. It shines best when used for singleplayer games or session-based games. But it has its share of problems when it comes to creating persistent world MMO games - poopy poor netcode and lack of multithreading which results in a crappy performance on both client and server if/when there are many (moving)objects and effects on the screen to render, track and broadcast to all involved players.

It shines best in single player FPS, because that's what it was originally designed for, correct.

2 cores is multi threading, and there's plenty of online games that run just fine on Unreal's net code.

These aren't ARK'S primary performance issues... That's down to client side. Namely, bad loading/file prioritization and (Mostly) archaic, resource hungry rendering techniques such as SSAO and DFAO....

With games that have as much going on as ARK, lighting and shading needs to be done for each mesh individually, not on the fly...

That said, with a team Wildcards size, that is simply way too much work. They'd never get the game off the ground.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know i am not the only one that noticed in the last topic created by TRH he didn't mention the 100 hard limit specifically only that they would be a hard limit. This does give me hope that we will be given more than the 100 originally proposed. My question here is with the update coming for Xbox the first week of December that's when we will get the counter? I would assume so but want confirmation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, HalfSlabBacon said:

These aren't ARK'S primary performance issues... That's down to client side. Namely, bad loading/file prioritization and (Mostly) archaic, resource hungry rendering techniques such as SSAO and DFAO....

I'd say that one of primary reasons for ARK's bad client-side performance is Dev's refusal of downgrading amount of triangles per object they design. Is has been known that simple metal walls have almost 10k triangles in their mesh, per wall. Plant Species X have about 98k tris - the reason why their firing animation has been disabled is because it killed the performance. Etc...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Volunteer Moderator
On 11/25/2017 at 2:18 PM, Zederia said:

In what way did he get it "Wrong" do tell. if I KNOW I can penetrate 100 turrets, no matter HOW you place them, and I don't PvP much at ALL do share your side and show me something you can't EASY demolish

Like previously mentioned, such tests before the 27th are pointless. The only thing he did, was increase the damage of the current turrets. He didn't take into consideration that new ones will have more health, and that other aspects of the current raiding meta will be balanced to accommodate the turret limitation. Like also mentioned by others, the placement is very important and define the efficiency of your defenses as well:

In conclusion, knowing how to penetrate 100 of the current turrets doesn't means that the same strategies will works for the new ones. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...