Host migration in empyrean/railjack

[(PSN)Bailiwick]

having 'good internet' isnt really realistic, for starters playing from a certain location impacts ur speed. and without dedicated servers we can do S#&$ about it. one of my friends lives out past galveston TX, he bought a router to use for all his 'equipment' however he lives in an apartment in a small town so nothing can really be done on that end. thats the case for alot players.

 

on the other hand when its not even connection related some players just straight up quit the mission and u have to HOPE u are the host otherwise the migration will fail and u will be sent straight back to your orbiter regardless, most likeley without any rewards and half your XP. u can put as much well wishes as u like on 'better internet' but SOMETHING should be done about this issue. if empyrean launches without it fixed i dont see it working out too well

[(PSN)AyinDygra]

I thought they showed what happens on Host Migration in the teaser video... you get pulled out of your little Tenno body and find yourself stuck in your real adult body without any void powers in a cruel, desolate world.

Oh wait... Duviri Paradox isn't out yet... or IS IT?

[SneakyErvin]

On 2019-10-02 at 3:03 PM, Loza03 said:

FTFY

Quote from @Letter13, all credit to them.

 

First, even though his math is correct he has some flaws in there. Renting servers across the globe would not make it more expensive, it would make it cheaper if they rent the farms in the right countries due to how "infrastructure bonuses" and "job opportunity bonuses" are handled in certain places. Many parts of europe have great options since parts of the investments will be covered by the governments since it improves the countires they are located in. You will simply get a massive discount just because you wanna rent farms in the country, and if you wanna build your own farms you get even more.

Secondly, DE, according to the last annual report from Leyou, have more than enough profit after expenses to cover well over 50.000.000 spent on servers. They would still rack in massive amounts of profit annualy.

Thirdly, he is basing it on insane american prices. A country that has no resemblance of understanding regarding how much a service should cost, neither when it comes to isp for people nor companies, or when it comes to renting out servers for clans. Is there any country in the world that has such a shady isp business going as the US? Highly doubtful. You pay premium $ for sub 3rd world internet.

[Loza03]

1 hour ago, SneakyErvin said:

First, even though his math is correct he has some flaws in there. Renting servers across the globe would not make it more expensive, it would make it cheaper if they rent the farms in the right countries due to how "infrastructure bonuses" and "job opportunity bonuses" are handled in certain places. Many parts of europe have great options since parts of the investments will be covered by the governments since it improves the countires they are located in. You will simply get a massive discount just because you wanna rent farms in the country, and if you wanna build your own farms you get even more.

Secondly, DE, according to the last annual report from Leyou, have more than enough profit after expenses to cover well over 50.000.000 spent on servers. They would still rack in massive amounts of profit annualy.

Thirdly, he is basing it on insane american prices. A country that has no resemblance of understanding regarding how much a service should cost, neither when it comes to isp for people nor companies, or when it comes to renting out servers for clans. Is there any country in the world that has such a shady isp business going as the US? Highly doubtful. You pay premium $ for sub 3rd world internet.

I don't have experience regarding points one and three - mostly on account of A: not being a software engineer, just spreading existing word and B: being British, so only hearing word-of-mouth how US internet goes (although I imagine a decent chunk of the servers would run on the US prices on account of being in the US - I mean, having servers in one of their biggest profit areas just makes sense)

But I do have a particularly stinging memory regarding point two: just because they seem to have the money, doesn't necessarily mean they do. Simply put - it would most likely wind up costing millions, and that on top of the existing price would most likely cut into some of DE's other funding. In particular, development, moderation, what have you. Might not be much, but remember: it does add up. I used to play the old Lego MMO 'Lego Universe' when I was a kid, and as far as I could tell it was pretty successful, with frequent and quite large updates over the year or so it was out for. However, a certain element of moderation (specifically, trying to moderate the 'properties', areas where people could display virtual Lego creations) constantly drained funds away from first the rest of moderation and then development, degrading the quality of both - in turn affecting profits as people turned away from the game and reducing their budget further. Not a fun time. Simply put, having big new a new cost could well adversely affect profits indirectly as well as directly. Just because on paper they can afford it doesn't mean they can in practice.

 

(also, that recent-ish multi-channel-network scandal made me very suspicious of official profit reports, but that's not exactly evidence, just general distrust)

[Troposphere6]

It is feasible that DE could have a default railjack that's used if players without a railjack are stranded in a railjack mission or maybe the mission ends in a similar manner to what happens if you "fail" in a sanctuary onslaught mission were the mission just ends like it had been completed. I'm also fairly confident that if it was cheaper or DE to rent server farms that there current method they'd be doing that as most companies are in the business of making money.

[(NSW)FlameDivinity]

On 2019-10-02 at 2:48 AM, Miser_able said:

Chances are nothing will be done, but if empyrean functions more like an open world map instead of a set mission, players who disconnect should be able to just rejoin at any time. 

You're probably correct. Each connectivity type has it's issues, and Host-Client is the best for such a game, and much cheaper than DE hosting servers. Peer-peer would be all of our issues magnified, and then some. And it would be cheaping out. Host-Client works best since we don't need to worry about server malfunction, and DE doesn't need to host servers all across the globe. Host migraine is inevitable with a Host-Client connection. It is what it is.

[SneakyErvin]

3 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

I don't have experience regarding points one and three - mostly on account of A: not being a software engineer, just spreading existing word and B: being British, so only hearing word-of-mouth how US internet goes (although I imagine a decent chunk of the servers would run on the US prices on account of being in the US - I mean, having servers in one of their biggest profit areas just makes sense)

But I do have a particularly stinging memory regarding point two: just because they seem to have the money, doesn't necessarily mean they do. Simply put - it would most likely wind up costing millions, and that on top of the existing price would most likely cut into some of DE's other funding. In particular, development, moderation, what have you. Might not be much, but remember: it does add up. I used to play the old Lego MMO 'Lego Universe' when I was a kid, and as far as I could tell it was pretty successful, with frequent and quite large updates over the year or so it was out for. However, a certain element of moderation (specifically, trying to moderate the 'properties', areas where people could display virtual Lego creations) constantly drained funds away from first the rest of moderation and then development, degrading the quality of both - in turn affecting profits as people turned away from the game and reducing their budget further. Not a fun time. Simply put, having big new a new cost could well adversely affect profits indirectly as well as directly. Just because on paper they can afford it doesn't mean they can in practice.

 

(also, that recent-ish multi-channel-network scandal made me very suspicious of official profit reports, but that's not exactly evidence, just general distrust)

While A is something that needs to be researched in depth by a company that is interested, there are still several cases regarding european expansions for several big companies. It is just very beneficial for all parties involved due to how the EU wants to expand their net along with trying to solve massive unemployment issues. EA and Google are just two in the last 10 years that have made massive advancements regarding server farms in Ireland (EA in preperation for the launch of ToR) and Google in the northern parts of Sweden, I also recall something regarding Google and Gotland in Sweden, that may however have been the project that got moved to Norrland instead.

Regarding US prices I've heard the dreadful stories first hand from my brother and his wife after he moved over there and tried to find a good isp for aceptable connection. That continued on with stories from friends in WoW during my US server days. The prices were insane. I pay something in the ballpark of $45 for my 24mb line in sweden and that is expensive in my mind when people have access to 100mb for $25 and 1000mb just below my cost. In there they payed alot more for less. Sure the bigger cities were at times cheaper and more advanced, but the prices were mostly silly along with a bunch of bandwidth caps and whatnot.

And I agree, even though it looks like they have the cash it may not be their best move to do it anyways. However, Path of Exile manages it well and they have servers for every single player playing the game, solo or in group. DE would likely manage aswell. Granted, WF is more advanced so a server would likely not be able to host as many players as a PoE one. But and this is a big but, they wouldnt need to cover every single player at every given time. Hubs could work just as they do now, solo missions could work as they do now, dojos could work as they do now etc. People would just need to accept that they cant start a game with "friends only" or "invite only" as an option, everything would instead either be public random matchmaking or premades set up before you sign up for a mission so the servers are utilized to their fullest capacity.

[Loza03]

1 minute ago, SneakyErvin said:

While A is something that needs to be researched in depth by a company that is interested, there are still several cases regarding european expansions for several big companies. It is just very beneficial for all parties involved due to how the EU wants to expand their net along with trying to solve massive unemployment issues. EA and Google are just two in the last 10 years that have made massive advancements regarding server farms in Ireland (EA in preperation for the launch of ToR) and Google in the northern parts of Sweden, I also recall something regarding Google and Gotland in Sweden, that may however have been the project that got moved to Norrland instead.

EA and Google are also massive companies - I imagine that some places might be interested in giving them extra discounts to get them to buy more, or individually negotiated prices or something. Google especially, because they are, well Google. DE isn't.

6 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

Regarding US prices I've heard the dreadful stories first hand from my brother and his wife after he moved over there and tried to find a good isp for aceptable connection. That continued on with stories from friends in WoW during my US server days. The prices were insane. I pay something in the ballpark of $45 for my 24mb line in sweden and that is expensive in my mind when people have access to 100mb for $25 and 1000mb just below my cost. In there they payed alot more for less. Sure the bigger cities were at times cheaper and more advanced, but the prices were mostly silly along with a bunch of bandwidth caps and whatnot.

Spoiler

 

7 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

And I agree, even though it looks like they have the cash it may not be their best move to do it anyways. However, Path of Exile manages it well and they have servers for every single player playing the game, solo or in group. DE would likely manage aswell. Granted, WF is more advanced so a server would likely not be able to host as many players as a PoE one. But and this is a big but, they wouldnt need to cover every single player at every given time. Hubs could work just as they do now, solo missions could work as they do now, dojos could work as they do now etc. People would just need to accept that they cant start a game with "friends only" or "invite only" as an option, everything would instead either be public random matchmaking or premades set up before you sign up for a mission so the servers are utilized to their fullest capacity.

That sacrifice could well be one DE is not willing to make.

[Klaleara]

2 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

First, even though his math is correct he has some flaws in there. Renting servers across the globe would not make it more expensive, it would make it cheaper if they rent the farms in the right countries due to how "infrastructure bonuses" and "job opportunity bonuses" are handled in certain places. Many parts of europe have great options since parts of the investments will be covered by the governments since it improves the countires they are located in. You will simply get a massive discount just because you wanna rent farms in the country, and if you wanna build your own farms you get even more.

Secondly, DE, according to the last annual report from Leyou, have more than enough profit after expenses to cover well over 50.000.000 spent on servers. They would still rack in massive amounts of profit annualy.

Thirdly, he is basing it on insane american prices. A country that has no resemblance of understanding regarding how much a service should cost, neither when it comes to isp for people nor companies, or when it comes to renting out servers for clans. Is there any country in the world that has such a shady isp business going as the US? Highly doubtful. You pay premium $ for sub 3rd world internet.

Also, I feel like the amount of people per server is off.  One, you wouldn't use one server, you'd cluster them (Multiple acting as one).  And the amount you'd cluster would change depending on the technology.  

Also, those numbers are more likely to feed an open world MMO, which I would "assume" would be much more difficult for servers to handle than something instanced like Warframe.

I'm 90% positive Warframe could EASILY handle dedicated servers, just like most online games do.  But alas, they have not, and so, probably will not.

[schilds]

On 2019-10-02 at 4:59 PM, (XB1)Shodian said:

Then I suggest making sure you have good internet and that your teammates do as well.

And every point on the network between you.

 

LAN party at DE? 😄

[SneakyErvin]

3 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

EA and Google are also massive companies - I imagine that some places might be interested in giving them extra discounts to get them to buy more, or individually negotiated prices or something. Google especially, because they are, well Google. DE isn't.

  Reveal hidden contents

 

That sacrifice could well be one DE is not willing to make.

Yep, very likely in both cases. Ireland got a massive deal with EA. Pretty much everything that goes into the EA server farm will become the property of Ireland when/if the ToR service reaches its expiration date. Or so it was said back when the deal was made. I also think DE is in the camp "it works well enough as it is". So imo the best move on DEs part would likely be to rework their matchmaking system etc. instead of launching dedicated servers. I mean WF is one of the few games where I can run into massive issues with P2P connections.

5 minutes ago, Klaleara said:

Also, I feel like the amount of people per server is off.  One, you wouldn't use one server, you'd cluster them (Multiple acting as one).  And the amount you'd cluster would change depending on the technology.  

Also, those numbers are more likely to feed an open world MMO, which I would "assume" would be much more difficult for servers to handle than something instanced like Warframe.

I'm 90% positive Warframe could EASILY handle dedicated servers, just like most online games do.  But alas, they have not, and so, probably will not.

I'm not quite sure where he's gotten it all from. I mean regular 64 player servers in a fps game are far cheaper than the expected price he presents, same goes for 100 player servers in a game such as DayZ. And those servers dont involve company deals etc. which would likely be even less costly due to the amount of servers that needs to be provided. Bulk tends to lower the price per unit and make the deals better and more appealing. 

[IIDMOII]

On 2019-10-02 at 1:07 AM, 844448 said:

Get decent internet and rig, DE can't do anything if you use excavated ancient relic and folded wires as your rig and internet

If they had a proper backend of dedicated servers, host migration wouldn't be necessary.

It's totally 100% up to DE to fix it. 

You can't brute force bad peer to peer networking.

 

[(XBOX)EPOSSTYLE]

So there is no way possible to log what u have earned so upon disconnecting issues(and its going  to happen) u cant be refunded....I call b.s. !!!

 

[844448]

1 hour ago, IIDMOII said:

If they had a proper backend of dedicated servers, host migration wouldn't be necessary.

It's totally 100% up to DE to fix it. 

You can't brute force bad peer to peer networking.

 

No kind of dedicated servers will save your game if your rig and internet are crap, it would make things worse if the server located far away

[FatCuteCat]

2 hours ago, 844448 said:

No kind of dedicated servers will save your game if your rig and internet are crap, it would make things worse if the server located far away

Meh answer.. even with 30mpbs you have struggled to host player from other regions.

[Kaotyke]

3 hours ago, (XB1)EPOSSTYLE said:

So there is no way possible to log what u have earned so upon disconnecting issues(and its going  to happen) u cant be refunded....I call b.s. !!!

 

The thing is not even here yet and you are assuming how it will be.

[(XBOX)COA Altair]

On 2019-10-02 at 1:35 PM, (NSW)Sk0rp1on said:

You just want everything handed to you? Get out your sextant and your abacus and figure it out!

Endgame!

You are a god amongst everything.  Bless you.  

I'm guessing the railjack will remain even if the host leaves and a migration happens.  I'm more concerned about when we'll get railjack rather then what problems will railjack have as no one is perfect so there will be problems with railjack, however, the big problems gameplay wise will be fixed asahp.  By big problems I mean things that break/crash the game, make mission(s) unplayable, etc. etc.  

[Arcira]

Pretty sure they´d have mentioned something in a dev stream or post if they are working on such a fundermental part of the game. If I had to guess we will see a lot of loosing rewards, bugs and glitches during host migration like always with all new content.

[(PSN)joehan1287]

Why does everybody assume the the Railjack of the Host Disappears after the Host Migration? After a Host migration the Mission will continue with the Railjack of the old host.

To the point of Deticated Servers  a disadvantage is that you can't play while a new update is released. The Division has normally 1-2 hours of down time for a update. 

[SneakyErvin]

12 hours ago, 844448 said:

No kind of dedicated servers will save your game if your rig and internet are crap, it would make things worse if the server located far away

You'd need to sit on 28k or 56k in order for that to happen nowdays.

I played WoW/DaoC/SWG on US servers for around 10 years from Sweden, first few years on a 512mb connection, the rest of them on a 24mb one and not top of the line rigs. I never had a latency issue and I played competative PvP in all of them. During those years I also played several fps titles on US servers since my brother lived there, never had an issue in those games either thanks to dedicated servers.

In a game such as WF it would also be a non-existant issue, because they wouldnt need regional servers in the sense that an MMO has them, because the game is instance based with small group multiplayer. So they could easily have servers all across the globe much like how GGG have them from NZ to NY. They simply dont need to decide on having a west coast, east cost, central, EU, Oceanic, asian or whatever type of server, they can have smaller ones in all places.

2 hours ago, (PS4)joehan1287 said:

Why does everybody assume the the Railjack of the Host Disappears after the Host Migration? After a Host migration the Mission will continue with the Railjack of the old host.

To the point of Deticated Servers  a disadvantage is that you can't play while a new update is released. The Division has normally 1-2 hours of down time for a update. 

They could always leave the P2P method in-game so people that really wanna play could do so during the downtime of the dedicated servers. I mean other games are already set up that way.

[Lanadra]

I mean.. it's going to be the same thing as it always is. The devs have never made the step to get rid of peer to peer, and they're not likely to do so now. So yes, you're going to have host migration and just as it is in normal missions, if you're unlucky you're going to get booted out of whatever you're doing.

[(NSW)Sk0rp1on]

12 hours ago, (XB1)COA Altair said:

You are a god amongst everything.  Bless you.  

I'm guessing the railjack will remain even if the host leaves and a migration happens.  I'm more concerned about when we'll get railjack rather then what problems will railjack have as no one is perfect so there will be problems with railjack, however, the big problems gameplay wise will be fixed asahp.  By big problems I mean things that break/crash the game, make mission(s) unplayable, etc. etc.  

What I’m curious about is if you have a railjack but leave to start a new clan. Do you have to build a new Spacedock.

[Troposphere6]

14 hours ago, (XB1)COA Altair said:

You are a god amongst everything.  Bless you.  

I'm guessing the railjack will remain even if the host leaves and a migration happens.  I'm more concerned about when we'll get railjack rather then what problems will railjack have as no one is perfect so there will be problems with railjack, however, the big problems gameplay wise will be fixed asahp.  By big problems I mean things that break/crash the game, make mission(s) unplayable, etc. etc.  

I'm guessing it's probably going to be mid to late November just because empyrean is being launched before the New war which is scheduled for Christmas which is December-January time. I'm guessing that Grendel and the dry dock will be launched this month.  It would also be in line with when there other content announced at tennocon has been released.  

[Kaotyke]

3 hours ago, (NSW)Sk0rp1on said:

What I’m curious about is if you have a railjack but leave to start a new clan. Do you have to build a new Spacedock.

Has been said before: the ship is yours.

You likely wont be able to make changes like change engines, names, colors and such.

Because everything they showed about those is in a terminal in the drydock.

[(XBOX)Dex Xean]

even with dedicated servers you will get players that will host migrate (d/c) cause the servers are too far from them what we gonna do then? get even more servers in more regions of the world? All that will change is different group of players will complain then it will be the ones in the countries too far away next so the solution then is to spend even more money then? atm most ppl just get host migration occasionally in all the time I have played this game in the past 3-4 years I only host migrated a tiny fraction of that time.