Pathetic that a multibillion $ company cant afford servers

General Discussion
21

They bought it for King and CoD.

1 Like
22

Takes quite a bit more in coding (That I don’t trust Blizzard to do), to actually allow for server picking. I typically have 40 ms, so I assume I’m connecting to Chicago, but if I queue with a friend from the west coast, I get 75-80 ms. It’s nothing major.

23

75-80 is terrible, that’s a huge disadvantage. West coast have it so easy they’re on like 1-15 ms

24

There’s barely a difference, what you probably experience is packet loss.

Friend of mine in LA is 30-50 depending on traffic. Stop making things up.

25

There’s literally pro teams who had facilities next to the servers, on next to zero png, huge advantage.

26

Keyword. NEXT to the servers. Realistically you’ll never be doing that, so don’t complain that you get 30-75.

27

You have pro players in Dallas with zero png on fortnite. Pro players move to Dallas just for that

Png is a huge advantage, you’re clueless to think otherwise

28

That’s sad. Very very sad.

Let me uproot my entire life just to have lower ping.

Like you sound very jealous. 30 ms is fine.

29

30ms feels good, but i guarantee zero to 15 would feel godly

Those pro players are making bank off cash cups, streaming their gameplay and you’re gonna hit way more insane clips on zero png

30

You have a very narrow understanding of ping in general, and that’s fine. Not all of us can understand how far down networking actually goes.

You can have 0-20 ms all day long, but if there’s an underlying issue at play (Packet loss, packet flood, etc), then trust me, you would want the 30-50 back.

31

They arent even using electric power,they use hamsters in wheels.

32

At least they have a big hampter!

33

Sort of came back to ranked after year and half, to play duo with a friend and we got a game with 180ms

… we won, but I think that competitive, at least, should have priority for maintenance periods