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

[ooStuStu]

I know you guys are not comparing WC to Rockstar  LOL .... RDR 2 drops next year ... that means they have been developing that game since 2010 .. and i bet it will be solid AF ..(oh and you will be able to swim)

I get what ole Sour puss battaroll is saying but ... anyone that has been involved in a large scale attack/defend situation on ARK knows the game can barely function while all those turrets are going off ...As long as we get a way to get the same DPS in the long run it will all be good..... However i do think the 100 limit is a little too low .. maybe double that with the new turret and whatever changes they do to Stego/C4 Meta

[Pendrodor]

Sorry but even if the new heavy turret had 4-5x more power than normal turret with 100 turret limit we will be able to place only about 20 turrets on each side of base in over all even if I would place 20 of the heavy ones on each side its still only 100 turret power on each side of the base which is NOT EVEN REMOTELY ENOUGH TO DEFEND BASE especially if the range is so big we wont be even able to place turrets on our walls around the base area for example red obelisk 

[BigRad]

anyway... has anyone considered stacking your 100 pretty much in one place at the center of the base(probably a tower)? then half the over amount of foundation length outward of the limited area, build more towers or even just like a circle of turrets? this meta can work but these weary heads aren't even giving it a chance. wait till you see all the ways you can set up, i'm sure the new turrets, the tek turrets, and the classic auto turrets will provide a fair defense/area ratio once they are buffed, and the stegos are nerfed a bit... also, has anyone here realized, there actually are good unofficial servers? try out some of the metas in unofficial and for those that can't cope with the new meta, just donate to my community so i can put up a classic meta server for you to come QQ on.

[romanaka3]

Maybe veggie cake heals depends on how much hp does dino have, like more hp they have less they heal
Or somthing like that

[Olivar]

Can we like....stick to the turret discussion?

[Naerah(Qc)]

Just now, Olivar said:

Can we like....stick to the turret discussion?

Oh yeah that, i can't decide i like or not, never had to put more that 4 on any of my bases... Im more interested in the cost of the new turret, and it's stats too.

[ciabattaroll]

Just now, romanaka3 said:

Maybe veggie cake heals depends on how much hp does dino have, like more hp they have less they heal
Or somthing like that

Are you talking "more hp" in terms of their numerical value HP or the percentage of health they have remaining? If it's the latter that actually sounds like a good idea if compounded with a static cooldown on how long it would take to use a veggie cake. That way it could reward smarter gameplay on using it at the right moment as opposed to going in like a daredevil and ending up getting killed before health gets restored, or using it too soon and not benefitting from any healing for a lengthy amount of time.

If it's the former then I'm not really sure how well that would help as stegos (the current meta favorite) are fairly middling in health, at least when compared to brontos.

[Eli]

Knock it off with the off-topic posting.

[romanaka3]

6 minutes ago, ciabattaroll said:

Are you talking "more hp" in terms of their numerical value HP or the percentage of health they have remaining? If it's the latter that actually sounds like a good idea if compounded with a static cooldown on how long it would take to use a veggie cake. That way it could reward smarter gameplay on using it at the right moment as opposed to going in like a daredevil and ending up getting killed before health gets restored, or using it too soon and not benefitting from any healing for a lengthy amount of time.

If it's the former then I'm not really sure how well that would help as stegos (the current meta favorite) are fairly middling in health, at least when compared to brontos.

I mean like if thery has like 12k hp and its cake then its heals like 30-40%
IF bronto has has 90kp cake heals liek 15-20% or so

[Olivar]

7 minutes ago, ciabattaroll said:

Are you talking "more hp" in terms of their numerical value HP or the percentage of health they have remaining? If it's the latter that actually sounds like a good idea if compounded with a static cooldown on how long it would take to use a veggie cake. That way it could reward smarter gameplay on using it at the right moment as opposed to going in like a daredevil and ending up getting killed before health gets restored, or using it too soon and not benefitting from any healing for a lengthy amount of time.

If it's the former then I'm not really sure how well that would help as stegos (the current meta favorite) are fairly middling in health, at least when compared to brontos.

They are currently implemented as 10% healing, with a hard-cap at 2100 health.
If this means removing the cap, but keeping the 30s cooldown, but making it based on their current HP difference I'd be all for it.
However, then it also means that they should remove the auto-eating of cakes so you can time it when desired.
Would indeed encourage more strategic usage of the cakes, but I think it might also be too cumbersome to open inventory, eat cake, close inventory and keep doing what you did.
I'd welcome the ability then to have it on the quickbar and allow it's usage from there.

[ciabattaroll]

5 minutes ago, romanaka3 said:

I mean like if thery has like 12k hp and its cake then its heals like 30-40%
IF bronto has has 90kp cake heals liek 15-20% or so

So you mean the former of the scenarios I asked then. Like I said, that might help in regards to people using bronto tanks, but people have been making use of stegos, which are nowhere near as high on health.

[HalfSlabBacon]

3 hours ago, TheRightHand said:

The vast majority of the servers that people play on are very expensive, custom-built servers with top of the line 8 core/16 thread cpus running at 4ghz, 64 gb of ram. We pay out the nose to make sure your servers are powerful.

The ARK Server also only uses 2 threads on the CPU. This is because the version of Unreal that we built the game on did not support multi-threading/paralellization. We have integrated Paralellized animation, and networking, so our networking overhead and cost of animation work are done on a 2nd thread. We're doing more work to try and thread more elements of the server, but it is incredibly complex and difficult work to do. Running 3 instances per server only takes up 6 cores at most. Having less instances per box would have no impact on the performance of each individual server.

- The Right Hand

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?

[LDrgn2015]

1 hour ago, Zederia said:

I don't see how WE should lose our bases for their "concerns" OUR "concerns," as players, outweigh the things that they are "concerned" about. they can code around their concerns, we cannot defend against them if they continue to cripple us

Not playin' on officials. Not even playing ARK right now, but....they had two full years to get into performance issues, bugs and glitches. Most of the time only new creatures came up, with new bugs and glitches and the obvious already known ones, have never been solved. After two years and release just saying: "Hey, we know that we have server issues and now we will take care of it by nerfing things instead of reworking code" is not the best solution. Besides that, in my opinion, coming up as a developer or game designer, whatsoever and tell the community, that WC is payin' there ass off for damn good servers, makes ist just more awkward. "Hey, we pay for your servers a lot, remember that, you should be thankful!" - Nope, there are people out there payin' $70 for an unfinished game. You should be thankful that a lot of people gone thru all that EA phase without quitting. (Flyer nerf was another great example!)

And before the hate/fanboy stuff comes up - criticism has nothing to do with "hate". Criticism is just a thing of players which are dissappointed of something they like or want to like and want to give some help and opinion.

@Zederia You are damn right buddy

[ciabattaroll]

5 minutes ago, LDrgn2015 said:

Not playin' on officials. Not even playing ARK right now, but....they had two full years to get into performance issues, bugs and glitches. Most of the time only new creatures came up, with new bugs and glitches and the obvious already known ones, have never been solved. After two years and release just saying: "Hey, we know that we have server issues and now we will take care of it by nerfing things instead of reworking code" is not the best solution. Besides that, in my opinion, coming up as a developer or game designer, whatsoever and tell the community, that WC is payin' there ass off for damn good servers, makes ist just more awkward. "Hey, we pay for your servers a lot, remember that, you should be thankful!" - Nope, there are people out there payin' $70 for an unfinished game. You should be thankful that a lot of people gone thru all that EA phase without quitting. (Flyer nerf was another great example!)

And before the hate/fanboy stuff comes up - criticism has nothing to do with "hate". Criticism is just a thing of players which are dissappointed of something they like or want to like and want to give some help and opinion.

@Zederia You are damn right buddy

They very literally said in the previous turret thread that these turret clumping performance issues weren't even a blip on their radar pre-launch. How do you propose they fix a problem that didn't even present itself?

[TheRightHand]

3 minutes ago, HalfSlabBacon said:

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?

Our dedicated servers cap out in the worst cases at 13-14 GB each. I don't know what could be causing your servers to be requiring that much per user, but even at 70 players maxed out our servers sit at about 13-14 GB of RAM.

 

[LDrgn2015]

7 minutes ago, ciabattaroll said:

They very literally said in the previous turret thread that these turret clumping performance issues weren't even a blip on their radar pre-launch. How do you propose they fix a problem that didn't even present itself?

Read the post again - there was also mentioned by TheRightHand, that the other possibility would be to rework the code, but it would be "a lot of work". (Don't know, but as a software developer myself, not in gaming though, I have to rework coding a lot of times to fix performance issues!) Did I say they can fix, what they don't know of? No, I didn't. Server performance was already not that good before this new issue came up. The way they handle it and decide is the mistake I'm talking about.

Just a more or less obsolete example for an issue appearing since beginning: Characters glitchin' thru walls or ceiling/foundations - there was a patch were it had been addressed. Today? You still have the chance to glitch thru any structure. Especially dinos getting stuck in foundations.

Besides that....if I pull out 2x weekends again and again, I might have thought about things like that before. People already defended there bases before, but 2x times gathering makes it less expensive to spam stuff.

[invincibleqc]

6 minutes ago, TheRightHand said:

I don't know what could be causing your servers to be requiring that much per user

Probably mods?

[Sniper22nd]

Great. Thanks for looking deeper into this. I have a suggestion. Most of us have a abundance of standard turrets that are going to become redundant after this comes in, so could this be an upgrade to standard turrets. For instance to craft it requires 1 standard turret then mats to make it bigger and better. 

 

Also will this this be introduced before the switch is flicked? Or will the switch be held back till this turret makes an appearance. Giving us time to adjust? 

 

Thanks 

[MandaBear]

@TheRightHand I know that the units measurement came out to be like 34 foundations wide, but can you tell me if that has a specific height to it? Or does that 100 turrets count with that same width from the floor of the map to the sky barrier? Or if he is busy, does anyone else know? 

[ciabattaroll]

13 minutes ago, LDrgn2015 said:

Read the post again - there was also mentioned by TheRightHand, that the other possibility would be to rework the code, but it would be "a lot of work". (Don't know, but as a software developer myself, not in gaming though, I have to rework coding a lot of times to fix performance issues!) Did I say they can fix, what they don't know of? No, I didn't. Server performance was already not that good before this new issue came up. The way they handle it and decide is the mistake I'm talking about.

Just a more or less obsolete example for an issue appearing since beginning: Characters glitchin' thru walls or ceiling/foundations - there was a patch were it had been addressed. Today? You still have the chance to glitch thru any structure. Especially dinos getting stuck in foundations.

Besides that....if I pull out 2x weekends again and again, I might have thought about things like that before. People already defended there bases before, but 2x times gathering makes it less expensive to spam stuff.

Again, they very much said, and I quote "Since about October or so, we saw a MASSIVE spike in the size of stalls and poor performance on our dedicated servers, but only some of them, most of them Ragnarok Servers". Sure there's other things that are causing performance issues, but we're handling THIS issue, right here, right now. And this issue din't really rear its ugly mug until after the game was already past launch.

[invincibleqc]

5 minutes ago, MandaBear said:

@TheRightHand I know that the units measurement came out to be like 34 foundations wide, but can you tell me if that has a specific height to it? Or does that 100 turrets count with that same width from the floor of the map to the sky barrier? Or if he is busy, does anyone else know? 

This is 100 turrets within a box of 10k units. A foundation is approximately 150 units large so 67 foundations diameter and 33.5 foundations radius in all direction.

[thedattrigga]

2 hours ago, Zederia said:

I don't see how WE should lose our bases for their "concerns" OUR "concerns," as players, outweigh the things that they are "concerned" about. they can code around their concerns, we cannot defend against them if they continue to cripple us

i completely agree with this, people in my tribe have tens of thousands of days played on this game and we’ve been working hard on a rag base since release, just to get our stuff taken away, it’s simply not fair and i think they should have a poll for updates

[invincibleqc]

Just now, thedattrigga said:

i completely agree with this, people in my tribe have tens of thousands of days played on this game and we’ve been working hard on a rag base since release, just to get our stuff taken away, it’s simply not fair and i think they should have a poll for updates

On the bright side, you get stronger turrets that are less redundant to refill!

[MandaBear]

Just now, invincibleqc said:

This is 100 turrets within a box of 10k units. A foundation is approximately 150 units large so 67 foundations diameter and 33.5 foundations radius in all direction.

So basically 33.5 high and then the 67 width from side to side? I apologize if the question is stupid, but I'm having a hard time visualizing the space. 

[thedattrigga]

Just now, invincibleqc said:

On the bright side, you get stronger turrets that are less redundant to refill!

yes, and like most people are saying, it’s definitely a step in the right direction, but the vast majority of their player base does not want this update, the youtubers such as jayex who helped build this game are against it, they should hold back on it for a little bit atleast and make more gradual steps towards this update instead