Wintergrasp lag a big issue after patch 3.1
by Mike Schramm 
May 6th 2009 at 9:00AM
Zarhym has got some answers to the widespread problem of lag in Wintergrasp after patch 3.1 the other week. He says Blizzard figures the problem is simply population based -- there are many more people playing in the battleground than there were before the patch. For that reason, they're having trouble coming up with good solutions: the battleground is designed to be non-instanced, and that's why a lot of people like it, so putting a limit on the amount of people in there is not the way to go. Hardware isn't a solution either -- Blizzard's hardware is already top-of-the-line, and not only would upgrading it take a while anyway, but my guess is that most of the lag issues come not from Blizzard's side, but from the connections between players and them, which they may not have any control over anyway.So yes, we're more or less out of luck -- as long as Wintergrasp is extremely popular (and even Zarhym remembers the naysayers before the release with a smirk), there will always be a certain amount of lag in there. There are a few good suggestions floating around the comments thread -- one is that Wintergrasp should always be conquerable, which seems like it would keep down on the flood of people, though of course there'd be other issues if that were implemented.
At this point, Wintergrasp lag may just be something we have to live with. Eventually, you have to think the population will drop back down, and then those of us still in there will enjoy lag-free battles again. But Blizzard has taken on quite a goal trying to do non-instanced PvP full of vehicles and towers without any lag at all.
Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Odds and ends, Blizzard, PvP, Battlegrounds
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 4)
Boylinux May 6th 2009 9:11AM
I onl get it in the final rush for the gate when everyone is around the gate. Before and after I usually have no issues on my server. Alterac Mountains. I can probabl;y see it on high pop servers.
Rylka May 6th 2009 12:50PM
The problem with increased lag I'm noticing is not just with WG, but all of WOW.
I'm on Uldaman-US, a medium pop server. Once 3.1 hit I noticed that my latency about doubled. It's not bad, but I went from hovering around 150 to hovering in the mid 300s. Instead of always having a green icon, now it's usually yellow. Not a big deal to those suffering world crashes I know, but it seems to indicate a deeper problem than just WG.
This is true pretty much everywhere in the games world(s), high or low population. Dalaran, WG, Loch Modan, or even out in some desolate zone by myself.
Latency does increase at higher pop times of day and places, but the increase I'm seeing is across the board. Low pop times/locations are around twice as laggy as previous low pop times/locations, and high pop times/locations are around twice as laggy as previous high pop times/locations.
It's not my connection because I get the exact same latency increase on different computers at different locations (home, work, etc.).
The increase I'm seeing is too constant to be from a sudden influx of players. I'm guessing something in the 3.1 code is taking more processing.
PyRoLiTe May 6th 2009 1:24PM
I don't know why they don't make WG just like the Bloodelf starting area...
Bloodmyst Isle is on it's own server just like all the different continents. You have to zone into ti and it isn't a limited number of players.
Make it so u can only get to WG by portal or Blizzard's automated flight paths and u can make it a zone on it's own...
Snapjak May 7th 2009 3:32AM
Actually no they're on the outlands servers.
Dah May 6th 2009 9:12AM
Sounds like the most practical fix is a design change that encourages people to spread out more. This would have to be a pretty big change since it's based on breaking in a base and clicking an orb. Having bases to capture and towers to attack/defend helps, but it doesn't change the fact that in the end, everyone is rushing to one spot for the last stand or last rush.
Daniel May 6th 2009 10:36AM
I agree. This statement is totally bogus: "designed to be non-instanced, and that's why a lot of people like it."
"Eventually, you have to think the population will drop back down"
Exactly. So instead of taking the initiative and doing it themselves, Blizzard is going to wait until players, in effect, instance WG themselves. How charming.
It may very well be true that it ultimately is a throughput problem, but Blizz had to know that before they designed it. If Blizz can't design it so it's lag free without instancing, them they might as well instance it.
TyKell May 6th 2009 1:56PM
Huh, gotta say I disagree. Maybe it's just me but I'd be willing to put up with some lag in order to keep the numbers up. A big part of the fun for me is the sheer number of players in each battle/skirmish, makes it feel more epic when there are players swarming.
As I said, could be just me though. Different strokes and all that jazz. :D
Quickshiv May 6th 2009 9:14AM
I don't know how much Zarhym should be smirking. If you removed VOA how many people would be playing it? The test at how good of job you did at making a game or zone in this case would be how many people would do it for fun and not just the rewards.
I like wintergrasp but it is far from perfect. We usually get about one full raid group and a few stragelers. My server is pretty low pop though. On our server it would be much better if it was a little smaller.
andyjay220 May 6th 2009 9:21AM
This. I know my guild will bring 20-30 ppl over to WG just to win so we can run vault. I wouldn't touch the place otherwise, and I bet many raiders are the same.
It's good that it has incentives so ppl use it, but the flooding of ppl is not necessarily due to it being awesome (although I do think it's fun).
turkeyspit May 6th 2009 10:09AM
If that were true, WG would only be populated 1 day a week.
I do WG simply because of the dailys, from which I get
a) about 40g
b)4k bonus honor
Even before 3.1 went live and I was honor capped, I still did WG every day for the free gold, and also because it can be fun to hold off a zerg of people with a cannon/demolisher.
ChiperSoft May 8th 2009 2:18PM
Personally I do it just because it's fun, more fun then even SotA. I've only done VoA once, I don't consider it worth my effort. The odds of a gear piece dropping that I can even roll on are slim, and there are better ways to get badges. The dailies are nice, but I'd still do it if dailies weren't there (infact I do, since I'm often in there multiple times a day).
Wintergrasp is the only place in the game where you get that feeling of being in a big army of individuals working towards a common goal. The only other game aspect that still approaches that same quantity of people is AV, which fails because people usually break up into little groups to hit different targets. On my realm we usually have at least two raids formed in WG, one last night had 4, all of them usually fighting in only two or three places.
Yes, having that many people in one place is lagtastic as all hell, but it's wicked fun!
Quickshiv May 8th 2009 2:23PM
You should look at warhammer online you might like it a lot. I would still be playing it if my friends hadn't gone back to wow. The whole world is wintergrasp.
jsz May 6th 2009 9:14AM
Magtheridon-US here. Wintergrasp is all but completely unplayable unless you somehow make it to a 7am raid. I admit I only play on offense for the most part (due to coincidence, oddly enough), and most of the time I will head toward a group of Alliance, spam Fan of Knives twice, see absolutely nothing happen for about 30 seconds, and end up being asked to release to the graveyard.
Radiophonic May 6th 2009 9:16AM
It's merely hearsay but I understand that on the server I play on, Alliance encourage as many players to come as possible in hopes that they lag it out and force a win. I don't play WG usually, so I can't confirm this. Seems like an evil tactic IMO.
Axolotl May 6th 2009 9:18AM
A lot of people fighting are there for other reasons too (like mining and herbalism), but I agree with the comment that without the instance that commes with controling the place, there would be less people in there. (kinda reminds me of that place in Outland where you had to cap towers once every so many hours)
Mullinator May 6th 2009 9:24AM
Here is the solution: Introduce another WG style PvP zone. Divide the populations between the two.
Bossy May 6th 2009 9:25AM
I love WG. But I avoid it in prime time during weekends.
The beauty of it is that you can have very different playing actions (attacking the southern towers or manning the combat tanks).
The best action in WG is when there are 2 Raids involved on each side. 80 against 80.
With these numbers I don't see any lag (perhaps I am lucky).
Of course with 200 people in one place fighting there can be problematic.
The magnitude of players battling in Wintergrasp shows there is a huge market for massive battles EVEN with lag.
Kyle May 6th 2009 9:30AM
On Mug'Thol its unplayable.
We usually crash the world server once or twice a day and the lag is immediate (pretty much destroying anything other than a spam zerg tactic).
I applaud what blizzard was trying to do with this but honestly I would be willing to make some concessions (such as instanced battles that average horde/ally wins losses to decalare an overall winner) so that we could actually PLAY the game.
And no the battles during the day arent much better, yes they have less lag but are still at the point where you are not truly participating in anything even mildly comprehensible.
great idea, execution needs a bit of work.
Bossy May 6th 2009 9:27AM
Very good idea.
Have another open world PvP zone and the public will stretch out.
Of course Blizzard had to experiment with LW. But who would have thought it would be that popualr?
Magilina May 6th 2009 9:32AM
personally I don't believe it has much to do with personal computers. It has become terrible and unplayable in the last 7 days. The last wg I did which was tonight RESET 3 times and WORLD SERVER went down. Thats not personal computer problems. Its really annoying when you are playing well and the lag causes you not to get marks, or even honor.