agressiv

Even if its instanced, the instances seem to share the same server.

Raiding PAO or VP while 3-4 guilds are in there and it simply sucks ass.

The contested zones at least spawn a new copy of the zone on potentially a different server (I've seen it happen in Sebilis in EQ2) and the Sebilis 2 was not laggy at all.

Same goes with the overland zones, but of course any Avatar spawn will only be in the primary one.

agressiv

__________________

methulah

There's still a significant difference. If there's only one player in a zone, the packets to each player only need to detail what that player is doing. If there are three, the packets to each player need to detail what that player is doing, and what the other two are, too. And this needs to go out three times.

If there are 24 in a zone, then it's twenty four times twenty four player's actions. If there are 300, then... you do the math. 48 players in the same zone uses FAR more bandwidth than two lots of 24 in different instances of the same zone, even if they share the same physical server.

__________________

agressiv

Not all actions of every player are sent to every client. In fact, you have to be in pretty close proximity to get anything more than a "in combat/ out of combat" type view of the player.

The lag you generally get in a contested zone is simply due to the amount of people in the zone and the CPU/memory of the server being overworked.

I don't disagree that there is a difference between instanced and contested lag, but the notion behind instances to me is still considerably less appealing than contested zones, regardless of lag.

Instances to me are just more easy-mode, contested dungeon crawling has a whole different flair to it that to me, is much more exciting.

agressiv

__________________

methulah

You also get that player's locations, where they're facing, what they're wearing, etc. It adds up, but yeah, like you, I don't give a fuck. I'd rather lag my way through a sweet contested crawl with camps and trains and interaction and dynamism, rather than go by the numbers through an instance I've run before and it's all the same.

__________________

SlotorDembeats

Just reroll on a pvp server and you won't need to worry about anyone camping a spot you want.

Suppose that's not an option though. I wonder what sos was like on the pvp servers.

Faminne

oh I use to hate that shit after calling camp check. You would wait a few minutes to make sure somebody was not in combat to reply to the camp check. If no reply we work our way down to find out its camped. Group just being aholes.


I will say this the only thing I hate about EQ2 is you cant train somebody in a contested zones. You want contested zone make everything agro to all in the zone. I want a way to stop the dam farmers.

Diknak

I haven't really seen camps in EQ2, especially in dungeons. PoA maybe, but even in SoS, people were constantly moving throughout the zone. SOE said they try to design contested dungeons that people will move through instead of kill and wait for respawns. EQ1 is a whole different story.

Argyuile

People just "camp" multiple mobs by moving back and forth between spawnpoints instead of sitting in one spot. Just look at KC or Sebalis.

__________________
Essential guide for posting on Flames

I'm willing to entertain your idiotic notion of how reality works if it'll get you to the point faster - Black Mage

It's time to prove to your friends that you're worth a damn. Sometimes that means dying, sometimes it means killing a whole lot of people. - Dwight

Deson

Yes but that means you can move through and beat them to the spawn. There are no EQ1 camps in EQ2, it's all about who pulls first and can win.

__________________

methulah

Plus, it matters a whole lot less in EQ2.

__________________