Poll: Was Big Bang worth it?
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
It's great! Couldn't have asked for more except a chinchilla!
11.35%
16 11.35%
It's good, but I do see some flaws.
41.84%
59 41.84%
It's okay. A lot is left to be desired though.
15.60%
22 15.60%
No feelings one way or the other.
2.13%
3 2.13%
It's not too bad, but they could improve it.
7.80%
11 7.80%
It's bad and needs to be heavily fixed or reversed out.
8.51%
12 8.51%
It's horrible! What the pineapple was Nexon thinking, much less smoking?
12.77%
18 12.77%
Total 141 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Was Big Bang worth it?
#61
Polantaris Wrote:I think the channels are still handled by one server...it seems unlikely that they have 19 or whatever servers for one full server, so splitting it into more channels wouldn't do anything.

It would lessen the KS wars and essentially give us a whole bunch more maps (for minidungeons of course)
Reply
#62
Polantaris Wrote:I think the channels are still handled by one server...it seems unlikely that they have 19 or whatever servers for one full server, so splitting it into more channels wouldn't do anything.

The channels are split 1 IP address per two channels. Unless they've assigned a single box 10 IP addresses the implication is 1 server per two channels.
It's not having what you want - It's wanting what you've got.
Reply
#63
Eosian Wrote:Unless they've assigned a single box 10 IP addresses the implication is 1 server per two channels.

They could be running on virtual servers, to help balance out the load a bit and be able to shuffle channels around for maintenance, but yeah, aside from CH1 (has its own server, since ch20 got removed, I believe) they're paired up.

Then again that implies competence of networking. They're probably all physical servers at IP addresses, and they only do maintenance once a week.
Reply
#64
Stereo Wrote:aside from CH1 (has its own server, since ch20 got removed, I believe) they're paired up.

Yes, 1 has it's own server then 2 is conjoined with the last server and all the others are joined with their immediate neighbor in an odd attempt at load balancing.

I've always assumed they use physical boxes for each IP just based on the way outages occur and since that'd provide the largest failover protection in the event of a hardware mishap. Virtualization is nice, but if your host dies all those instances go with it.
It's not having what you want - It's wanting what you've got.
Reply
#65
maiiev Wrote:- I really feel HP/MP should have been reset so that HP washing is negligible, I say this as a player who has done it a lot. I don't think anyone should permanently benefit from something that is no longer exploitable.

Why reset something that was never broken / an exploit to begin with? O_o

Also if they reset HP / MP, then Ranged are more screwed then ever, because some mob damage was increased quite a bit to match their level, thus limiting ranged even more.
Reply
#66
Before I say anything else, I'd like to say that they're giving out free SP resets - 1 per character - but it seems like a lot of the people in here don't know that.

BB is the best thing ever and the only people having issues are the ones with technical issues or people 150+ who lack basic math skills and make hasty decisions.

I just did 1 - 59 in 2 days without hacking, pay money, or even trying all that hard. How is that bad? Who is it bad for?

Me, my entire buddy list, and my guild have not had any kind of issues whatsoever (SP reset whining not withstanding).
Reply
#67
Its worth it for me in the position im in, with low level characters and no grinding motivation pre BB.

of course, not to directly toot horns, but people always have to complain about something so im not suprised people are raging about loss of 2x and the like.
Reply
#68
Herborist Wrote:I just did 1 - 59 in 2 days without hacking, pay money, or even trying all that hard. How is that bad? Who is it bad for?

1) Anyone who appreciated the game for the challenge that it no longer has, and 2) anyone who expects it to be equally as quick to get all the way to 200 and loses interest when it goes from 30 levels a day to 30% a week.

 Spoiler
It's not having what you want - It's wanting what you've got.
Reply
#69
Eosian Wrote:1) Anyone who appreciated the game for the challenge that it no longer has, and 2) anyone who expects it to be equally as quick to get all the way to 200 and loses interest when it goes from 30 levels a day to 30% a week.

 Spoiler

I stopped reading after it became apparent that you regard leveling as an accomplishment.

"Look at me, I have massives amounts of time and/or several 2x cards. Hai guise, you leik mah akomplishmants?"

Honestly, you solo'ed zakum for six hours? I'm more disgusted than impressed.
Reply
#70
I never said it was an accomplishment. I said it was a challenge. If you don't understand the distinction that's your loss.

I don't care whether you were impressed or not, it wasn't about you, it was proving to myself that a 'worthless AM' could do it if they tried.
It's not having what you want - It's wanting what you've got.
Reply
#71
Eosian Wrote:I never said it was an accomplishment. I said it was a challenge. If you don't understand the distinction that's your loss.

I don't care whether you were impressed or not, it wasn't about you, it was proving to myself that a 'worthless AM' could do it if they tried.

The only challenging part is finding the ridiculous amounts of time it would take, and again, I'm more disgusted than impress. You didn't do it - 6 hours proves that if you stand there and spam attacks + pots, anyone could do it. Do it in under an hour, or better yet, in under 30 minutes, and then you can draw a conclusion.

"I ran a marathon... 3 years... in a car..."
Reply
#72
By your logic moving a mountain single handedly isn't an accomplishment if someone else could've done it quicker using better tools.
Getting the job done is getting the job done, regardless.
I don't have any obligation to live up to your standards of what's good enough.
It's not having what you want - It's wanting what you've got.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: