Forum: empire-en
Board: [585] Technical Assistance
Topic: [76581] Update Warnings
[-76581]
lord woolyback (GB1) [None]
:: Sept. 4, 2012, 9:09 a.m.
I'm really getting pissed off with the 1 minute warnings of shutting servers down. What good is 1 minute ggs? and now i cant log back on either. It's regular that there's problems and bugs on this game and i think it's about time you sorted yourselves out. For a game that costs some people money it's not very well organised. And additionally, any chance of letting people know an approximate length of time that servers will be down? It's getting stupid with the bugs and problems , so can you once and for all get your act together?
[1385315]
BobFighter834 (INT2) [None]
:: Sept. 4, 2012, 9:13 a.m.
1 minute is slightly ridiculous. 10 minutes would be a lot better, or, even better, announce the EXACT time that the update will start - I don't want "roughly 8:30-11:30 and not even bothering to use a time zone": I want, no, NEED "exactly 11:00 GMT+2".
[1385325]
Unknown
:: Sept. 4, 2012, 9:17 a.m.
Hi Guys,
We don't give exact times since the updates are done on a 2 tier system. The update is uploaded to certain servers first and then checked for deployment problems. Sometimes at that stage we will find a bug and need to take the patch off again to tweak it before deployment again. Since we ourselves do not know the exact time that the server will be available again we give a larger time slot.
The more observant among you will notice though that it usually happens around 10am.
Regards;
Malreyn
We don't give exact times since the updates are done on a 2 tier system. The update is uploaded to certain servers first and then checked for deployment problems. Sometimes at that stage we will find a bug and need to take the patch off again to tweak it before deployment again. Since we ourselves do not know the exact time that the server will be available again we give a larger time slot.
The more observant among you will notice though that it usually happens around 10am.
Regards;
Malreyn
[1385328]
BobFighter834 (INT2) [None]
:: Sept. 4, 2012, 9:19 a.m.
CM Malreyn wrote: »Hi Guys,
We don't give exact times since the updates are done on a 2 tier system. The update is uploaded to certain servers first and then checked for deployment problems. Sometimes at that stage we will find a bug and need to take the patch off again to tweak it before deployment again. Since we ourselves do not know the exact time that the server will be available again we give a larger time slot.
The more observant among you will notice though that it usually happens around 10am.
Regards;
Malreyn
Hm...
Are you absolutely sure that you can't give us a 180 second warning? 3 minutes would be 3 times as good.
[1385333]
Unknown
:: Sept. 4, 2012, 9:23 a.m.
BobFighter834 wrote: »Hm...
Are you absolutely sure that you can't give us a 180 second warning? 3 minutes would be 3 times as good.
I can certainly pass the feedback on and see what we can do.
Malreyn
[1385348]
lord woolyback (GB1) [None]
:: Sept. 4, 2012, 9:32 a.m.
Why do the updates need to be done at 10 am? Why cant they be done at a time where most people are offline? Seems like an obvious solution to this problem. The amount of people put out by these rediculous update times must be astronomical.
[1385354]
JR1290 [None]
:: Sept. 4, 2012, 9:38 a.m.
lord woolyback wrote: »Why do the updates need to be done at 10 am? Why cant they be done at a time where most people are offline? Seems like an obvious solution to this problem. The amount of people put out by these rediculous update times must be astronomical.
People play across the world. It is just the way it is.
It will all be back online shortly just wait
[1385398]
SirFiddlesticks (AU1) [None]
:: Sept. 4, 2012, 10:16 a.m.
I completely agree with longer warnings. I personally (and I'm sure many others) wouldn't mind the new updates being released 10 mins later, if they just delayed the 2nd part of the 2 tier update for a while so us players could set up taxes, upgrades, and end any unfinished business or chats.
[1385405]
Sam4 (GB1) [None]
:: Sept. 4, 2012, 10:23 a.m.
A 10, or even 30 minute warning would be brilliant. Gives you time to sort things out instead of the mad rush to check that everything's an order in the space of a minute.
[1385412]
Baldrick (GB1) [None]
:: Sept. 4, 2012, 10:28 a.m.
A 10, or even 30 minute warning would be brilliant. Gives you time to sort things out instead of the mad rush to check that everything's an order in the space of a minute.
30 minutes would give players the opportunity to send an attack knowing that the defender wouldn't be online when the attack arrives.
[1385422]
Sam4 (GB1) [None]
:: Sept. 4, 2012, 10:38 a.m.
30 minutes would give players the opportunity to send an attack knowing that the defender wouldn't be online when the attack arrives.
Like they can with this update? We knew the time this was going to happen in order for people to take advantage of it - not quite seeing the difference.
[1385429]
Baldrick (GB1) [None]
:: Sept. 4, 2012, 10:47 a.m.
Like they can with this update? We knew the time this was going to happen in order for people to take advantage of it - not quite seeing the difference.
We only have a rough idea of when the update will actually happen. 30 minutes notice would give too precise information.
[1385448]
Sam4 (GB1) [None]
:: Sept. 4, 2012, 11:05 a.m.
We only have a rough idea of when the update will actually happen. 30 minutes notice would give too precise information.
I was told that this update would occur/start sometime between half 9 and half 10. And that seems at least close to the truth? I don't know when people first knew this estimated time, but it may have given people up to a day, let alone 30 minutes, to prepare attacks to catch people unable to log on.
[1385486]
yugdsfdsf [None]
:: Sept. 4, 2012, 12:31 p.m.
i should be 15 m
[1385491]
Baldrick (GB1) [None]
:: Sept. 4, 2012, 12:38 p.m.
I was told that this update would occur/start sometime between half 9 and half 10. And that seems at least close to the truth? I don't know when people first knew this estimated time, but it may have given people up to a day, let alone 30 minutes, to prepare attacks to catch people unable to log on.
My point is that if someone is given exactly 30 minutes notice they can launch an attack knowing it will land when the server is down.
Between half nine and half ten is totally different. And usually the servers aren't down for that long, so it would be quite difficult to work out when everyone would be offline.
I do agree that 1 minute is not enough. But it is like this as it's pretty difficult to launch an attack in 60 seconds. Unless you're level 5.
[1385520]
SirFiddlesticks (AU1) [None]
:: Sept. 4, 2012, 1:06 p.m.
But then anything more than 1 min (we're talking about say 5-10 here) makes it possible to launch at attack if you focus solely on this. It evens out when both players in a war against each other does the same thing, while it its a surprise attack, they'll face retaliation... the point here is that should this be sacrificed so that players can have time to upgrade buildings and set taxes and finish up their business before getting booted off? I vote yes.
[1385521]
Sam4 (GB1) [None]
:: Sept. 4, 2012, 1:07 p.m.
My point is that if someone is given exactly 30 minutes notice they can launch an attack knowing it will land when the server is down.
Between half nine and half ten is totally different. And usually the servers aren't down for that long, so it would be quite difficult to work out when everyone would be offline.
I do agree that 1 minute is not enough. But it is like this as it's pretty difficult to launch an attack in 60 seconds. Unless you're level 5.
No I do agree with you in most of what you're saying. I think a compromise of maybe 10 minutes might be good, but maybe even that's too much notice. I'll either be like it is now - an inconvenience, Or an extended warning making it TOO convenient :P
I have to disagree with the server downtime thing haha - every update takes hours longer than planned due to bugs or whatever the excuse is...They should have a test server to literally 'test' it before they implement it.
[1385556]
SirFiddlesticks (AU1) [None]
:: Sept. 4, 2012, 1:34 p.m.
I have to disagree with the server downtime thing haha - every update takes hours longer than planned due to bugs or whatever the excuse is...They should have a test server to literally 'test' it before they implement it.
I just wanna draw your attention to the fact that GGE have mentioned it is difficult to create a test server of lots of player identities with their current amount of manpower. Thats why some bugs pop up when millions of players login. Mind you, I'm just as annoyed and disappointed as you, but thats how things work...
[1385571]
SilverGuard [None]
:: Sept. 4, 2012, 1:50 p.m.
CM Malreyn wrote: »Hi Guys,
The more observant among you will notice though that it usually happens around 10am.
Regards;
Malreyn
very charming...