Ryzom Forge Public Meetings agendas & reports

Ryzom Forge meeting report – December 6, 2021

1 - Report about recent crashes

Ulukyn (RT) – 20:36 UTC
Let's talk a little about the recent server problems, there have been several.
The first problem, the most critical, was quite particular and could crash any Ryzom service. Indeed, a Ryzom server is composed of many services which manage an aspect of the game: the EGS which manages the entities (NPC, creatures, actions, etc...), the IOS manages texts and chats and other smaller services but whose role is also important. Now, the bug could occur in one of these services and up to 2-3 times a day, which depending on the service that crashed could cause chain reactions (and therefore a server that crashes completely). The reason of the crash is a bit technical (I could give more details if needed) but a fix was applied and since then none of the services crashed because of this bug.
Another bug has finally been fixed. This is one of the oldest known bugs in the game. We suspected that it came from the missions and we had a hunch that it only happened with characters returning to the game after a long absence. We were able to investigate this bug because we unintentionally caused it by moving occupations into Kitins' Lair. This maneuver, in fact, unknowingly caused the aliases (identification numbers saved in the character's file kept by the server) of the missions concerned to change. Now, if a mission changes aliases and a player has kept the old alias in the character's save file on his own machine, the server will crash as soon as the character in question is loaded. This is because aliases were not originally designed to be changeable... no one anticipated that some missions would be moved from one continent to another. Finally, this diagnosis made it easier to find and fix the bug and the unfortunate player who was crashing the server every time he tried to log was finally able to join Atys without a hitch.
A third bug has been identified in the IOS, which occurs quite rarely. We made the hypothesis that it occurred when a message was sent by the server on a dynamic chat channel, at the same time as one of the players disconnected and added several checks to avoid this conjunction. For the moment, no new crashes have been reported. We keep an eye on it though.
Finally, the last bugs (which cause slowdowns and huge delays in sending messages) occur when the SU crashes (SU = Shard Unifier, a service especially useful when several servers are running - like Aniro, Arispotle and Leanon - or when Ring sessions are active). We have already fixed one of them, the fixing of another is in progress. We will strengthen the part of SU code that handles database writing.
That's it for the information about the recent crashes. Are there any questions?

Q: Is this one of those bugs that was causing the chat channels to mix? And does that mean that this mixing will not happen anymore?
Yes, the first one described above. And no, the channel mixing will not happen anymore..

2 - Feedback on the Client's beta tests

Ulukyn (RT) – 21:02 UTC
See forum.
We need as much feedback as possible, because the timing of the next patch depends on it: the sooner we validate the beta client, the sooner we will patch the new features.
So, are there people who have been able to play with the beta client regularly?

Q: Is the "beta client" the RyZtart launcher?
No, RyZtart simply allows you to activate the game in beta mode on the Atys server (and not on one of the test servers). This allows you to test the next client patch "in real conditions". It is recommended, however, to backup the save/ directory before testing.

Q: For me, the titles don't work, and neither does the sound.
The titles are being totally recoded in a simpler and more modern interface. They will be compatible with the new client in the next patch. As for the sound, fixing is in progress: we will contact you if needed.

Q: Your recommendation to backup save/ beforehand is what made me recoil so far. Do we really need to backup save/ before every beta game session?
Actually, one should always save, but it's more of a precaution than anything else. For the moment the only bug that has caused problems is the unexpected resetting of the UI that occurs when switching frequently between normal and beta client: without backup, the player is then forced to reposition to his taste all windows. But so far, no problems with macros, landmark pennants or others, just a bug reported regarding friends groups which is currently being checked (we will let you know if it is confirmed).
That said, if RyZtart automatically created a zip of the save/ folder each time beta mode was activated/deactivated, it would probably help to have more testers….

Q: The RyZtart launcher should also just be more promoted (a lot of players don't read forum announcements). A once per day reminder in Universe channel, like ''Please check out RyZtart and the beta client'', maybe?
We will think about it.

3 - Feedback on Boss refactoring

Ulukyn (RT) – 21:23 UTC
See forum.
What are your feedbacks, especially about the new algorithm of spawn of Bosses?
We would like, indeed, to know if its activation in all regions of Atys is now possible or if it still needs some adjustments.

Q: Some say that no Boss spawns in the Savage Dunes anymore. What about this?
We haven't spotted any bug so far, at least by looking at the logs.
(three minutes pass in silence…)
No other remarks… So we can expect a switch to the new system soon. This will allow us to move on to new stages of the project.

4 - Progress on OP refactoring (GvG)

Ulukyn & Tykus (RT) – 21:30 UTC
The project is pretty well advanced.
We are running the last alpha tests and the tests on the test servers (Yubo & Gingo) should start soon. At the moment they are focusing on new GvG outposts in zones 50 and will allow us to determine if the NPC setting is good (it is at its minimum, but fighting a guild and NPCs simultaneously can be a bit of a challenge).
During this GvG test, we will move forward with the rest of the project. Some of the changes that are already ready, such as reducing the duration of battles to 1 hour and lowering the cost of attacks, could be implemented quickly. The rotation of materials and the taking of outposts by hostile NPC tribes would then come in a later phase of project development.
We agreed to give the project a boost over the next two months.

Q: Will, as for a classic attack, the attacking NPCs have to fight the NPCs of the attacked outpost too?

Q: Will, eventually, ALL outpost battles have to be fought in GvG only?
Not at all. Battles will remain as they are now, we will simply add a GvG attack option, which will be limited in its use. Also, battles for outposts in the Nexus will remain in GvE. This means that outposts will offer a wider range of possibilities.

Q1: Isn't it feared that some of these changes will make it difficult for our guild to retain the many outposts it owns for several years?
Q2: Our guild owned a level 200 outpost for a few weeks and Q250 mats have been produced… in very low amounts. For lower level OPs, it will be worse and even less attractive, I think. So will there be any change in the production of the outposts? For example, better quality materials for a level 50 OP?
Yes, this is planned. The production rates will not be the same at all, but a 50 OP will be able to produce Q250 mats (in smaller quantities than a 250 OP of course). And a 250 OP could also end up producing only Q50 mats (a depleted mining seam). This means that (and to answer the first question) retain an outpost will not be as interesting as it is now: it will be much more profitable to change for another.

Q: Isn't it feared that, in the long run, only the richests can afford it? That, in the long run, many OPs will never be attacked, thus left in the possession of NPCs useless to the life of the game?
As said above, the cost of conquest of outposts will be drastically reduced and, moreover, it will be variable depending on the mode of conquest (GvE, GVG or FvF).

Q: Will there be other productions than the current ones on these new outposts, which would make their possession more interesting?
Yes, but the working group in charge of the project confirms its original intention: these new productions adding value to the ownership of the outposts will only be implemented once the overhaul of the battle mechanics is completed. This will allow everyone to benefit, regardless of their preferred type of PvP and the effort they are able to put in.

The meeting is closed at 22:17 UTC


Show topic
Last visit Thu May 19 09:56:35 2022 UTC

powered by ryzom-api