General lag of all the graphics in the game

[Afoder67]

Yes, it appears to be much better. All windows opening correctly, but I have only just logged in

[Dragonia]

Yey, the UI bug (where ingame windows has been drawing very slowly) looks like is fixed now.

Confirming that : UI windows opens normally now and all UI fragments / controls seems to be in place.

Thank you BB Devs good work.

Time to return to game and enjoy new PvP update.

[Hussar1683]

Im not sure if what i want to describi can be counted as "lag" of any kind. More like some desync between what happens on our screen and on the server. First sing of this was (not)completed procuction of new weapons, which is already described in diffrent topic. But today It went more serious. I was doing SotV and i sent an attack that was suppposed to pass enemy intercept zone by just 1 square. I remembered some problems in that are before, so this time i was watching my gneral carefully, all the way along the red area, ready to retreat him. He passed near the red zone, moved for like 15 secs more and then just disappeared. then, another 20-30 secs or so I recieved 'your general was victorious' msg, and the camp i just carefuly watched passing by, was destroyed. Conclusion - what happened on my screen was totally diffrent from what happened on the server side. Wasnt just lag or delay. It was totally diffrent pathfinding, leading to unwanted intercept and serious unit loss. From now on im not playin any adventures untill things are back to normal. Cos for me clearly unplayable now.

[Sir_Killemall]

Are BB doing anything about the lag in game yet? Have they even recognised they have added massive lag since the last big update?

Again today I had a jumping general, jumped forwards, attacked a camp but used the remains of a setup from the previous camp that I had changed about 45 seconds before.

[lordloocan]

Looks as if they have dropped the graphics resolution as a way to fix it. Graphics are far less sharp today.

[Salem_Warrior_1]

seams BB's idear of fixing things is to drop grafix, are we going back to the days of the spectrum 128, new players wont wont to play on a game that looks like an old 1980's game, come on BB....
trying to push packets threw Flash is the problem, we all know this, but bury our heads, take game and go direct......i pinged settlers and its dropping 5% packets going threw flash..
so your so called fix costs us , not you..i see a pattern here
Read up on flash its for small browser games..wake up BB its 2014.

[EctoRune]

BlueByte, please tell me you didn't drop graphics quality in order to improve server performance. Because there are very few explanations I can think of why it would have any effect, and they're all awful.

1. The servers are having bandwith issues
That's ridiculous. In a world of flexible, cheap easily accessible cloud computing there's no reason why the couple of MBs of bandwith the graphics take per log-in should have any effect at all. BB is owned by Ubisoft who has its own digital distribution platform, so we know they're able to push the data around.

2. The servers handle some part of the graphics calculations
If this is the case, we might as well just all lay down and give up, because the world is over. But even BlueByte wouldn't violate the Server/Client dynamic that awfully. Especially not for no reason.

3. It's an unintended side-effect of another change
I really hope it's this one. And I think it almost certainly has to be. It seems especially likely when considering that "unintended side-effect" is basically the unofficial TSO motto

[Singaboy]

The zooming stages have been changed form 16 to 10, so something has been changed intentionally one would think

[Narcil]

BlueByte, please tell me you didn't drop graphics quality in order to improve server performance. Because there are very few explanations I can think of why it would have any effect, and they're all awful.

1. The servers are having bandwith issues
That's ridiculous. In a world of flexible, cheap easily accessible cloud computing there's no reason why the couple of MBs of bandwith the graphics take per log-in should have any effect at all. BB is owned by Ubisoft who has its own digital distribution platform, so we know they're able to push the data around.

2. The servers handle some part of the graphics calculations
If this is the case, we might as well just all lay down and give up, because the world is over. But even BlueByte wouldn't violate the Server/Client dynamic that awfully. Especially not for no reason.

3. It's an unintended side-effect of another change
I really hope it's this one. And I think it almost certainly has to be. It seems especially likely when considering that "unintended side-effect" is basically the unofficial TSO motto

what world do you live in? bandwidth isn't cheap! its no excuse for these piss poor performances tho.

[EctoRune]

what world do you live in? bandwidth isn't cheap! its no excuse for these piss poor performances tho.

On the scales that TSO uses bandwidth it is really rather cheap. I could buy an Azure server from Microsoft now and pay less than $0.1 per Gigabyte. That would get cheaper the more bandwidth is used, of course. And that's just what I could buy right now. Most likely BB would be able to negotiate a better deal than I can.