New Performance System Limits Instance Creation

If you've entered an instance and received the message "Additional instances could not be launched. Please, try again later," you have seen first-hand the new instance performance balancing system that has been implemented to limit the total number of instances that can be created on each realm. Wryxian on the official European forums has supplied the following information :

This update instituted a load check that limited opening of additional instances. This will result in throttling of some instance creation. ... Ultimately, we felt that some wait time for players attempting to create a new instance was better than causing bad performance for all players in instances.

Wryxian also said Blizzard will continue to collect data and their ultimate goal is to remove the instance limit. You can read the full post below.

To ensure stable and positive performance in raid and dungeon instances, an instance performance balancing feature was implemented which limits the total number of instances that can be created on a realm. Prior to this change, we were seeing serious issues in instances which greatly degraded instance performance, and in some cases, caused them to crash entirely.

This update instituted a load check that limited opening of additional instances. This will result in throttling of some instance creation where users receive the following message: "Additional instances could not be launched. Please, try again later." Ultimately, we felt that some wait time for players attempting to create a new instance was better than causing bad performance for all players in instances.

We are continually monitoring the realms affected by this, and use the data we gather to implement further optimisations. Our ultimate goal is to work toward the removal of the limit.

Comments

Post Comment
People still stupid I see
# Feb 21 2009 at 12:37 AM Rating: Decent
The problem extends beyond a "simple" technical aspect, people fail to realize this (mmorpgs) are inherently different from other games that require a server or host. Let's assume there is a miracle server somewhere (in the figment of your imagination) that can greatly increase the performance of its clients provided money isn't an issue (which it certainly is not when it comes to Blizzard). Now what (reasonable solution) is there to prevent people (human beings and I know how social contact is a bit of a scary novelty for some of you) from all migrating to a certain server, you don't think high population servers happen by chance now do you? If your friends (in game or in real life) decide that server X is a great place to play, you would probably end up on that server. Now if they suddenly decide that server Y is now a better place and migrate there, what would you do? And what if all of the guilds of your server even low population ones decide to raid at the same particular time? What then?

There is no simple solution to this problem, and Blizzard hasn't stated that the solution they proposed to be in any sense permanent, if anything it helps as it might help better allocate technical resources.

And I love it when people pretend they can somehow magically solve the problem because you know Blizzard doesn't have professionals working on stuff like this or anything or they are somehow more qualified to state their "opinion" on the matter because they have experienced it. Think before you open your mouth, so you don't have **** spewing out of your mouth and that same **** doesn't end up being stuffed back :)
oh well
# Feb 20 2009 at 11:44 AM Rating: Decent
price you pay for being on a high pop server.
Catch 22 situation
# Feb 19 2009 at 11:18 PM Rating: Good
I would be able to appreciate what Blizzard had done, throttling the instances to try and create a playable realm, if the queues to get on the realms had gone (they are back on my server), and the game didn't lag when you hit Dalaran and other areas.

I can appreciate that bandwidth and server power come at a cost, I work in an industry where we have to balance all of this ourselves against the cost, but at the end of the day, it is our customers that we want to keep happy, so the cost is more often than not justified.

It is fine for Dauphine to say that if players just keep trying for 1 minute maximum they will get it, this is not always the case. I have now given up on the idea of trying to get into any instance until they have this rectified as during the evenings and weekends when I am playing I can be trying constantly for up to 5-10 minutes and just keep receiving the same message, no matter what instance we try and get into. I spend most of my time out in the PVE environment and only occassionally have the need to enter an instance with my group as it is difficult getting us all online for any fixed duration at any time, so to take all that planning and preperation, give up our time for a run, only to find out that it has been for nothing is very demoralizing.

It does not help that the server I am on is pretty high level. A majority of the players have reached 80 and are running the instances rather than spending time in the world, so it does tend to overbalance things.

It would be better if there could be a queueing system like there is at the login. At least you can try and enter the instance gate and be placed in a holding queue where you can be given a number - and a time - when the instance will be available. At the moment it is pot luck as to who gets in and when.
Catch 22 situation
# Feb 20 2009 at 1:47 AM Rating: Decent
**
461 posts
Judging from the feeling in my guild what annoys us most is the lack of communication and lottery that now appears to be timing an instance run. There is no indication as to which instances are available and when you are likely to get in. The '1 minute' bracket mentioned is a fallacy and given there is no queue system a newly formed group can just turn up at the gate and hey presto they get in much to the chagrin of the 10 other groups who have being hurling themselves against the instance portal for a considerably longer time.

Now the comments about PVP'ers Q'ing are of course right but at the same time misplaced. As someone who enjoys BGs I often queue on three battlegrounds and then zip off to do something else. The timers tell me approximately how long I have, I know I will get a pop-up to tell me that I can now join etc. This is not available for PVE'ers wanting to do instances. If Blizzard is going to go the route of limiting the PVE experience - and after all they set the rules no matter how much we winge, then I think they should at least implement (1) some indication of the population in instances i.e. a typical Q time for each instance and (2) an organized queue system.
#REDACTED, Posted: Feb 19 2009 at 10:33 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Funny when your post dont show anymore did I hurt some crybabys feelings is that why my post was removed HAHA
LOL
# Feb 20 2009 at 1:06 AM Rating: Good
Nitogs, your post was not removed. If you change your filter to "never filter" you can see it to point and laugh at, too.
ugh
# Feb 19 2009 at 1:46 PM Rating: Default
Yet again the PvE players get the shaft. GG Blizz, get activision the **** out of your business - you were better off without them.
ugh
# Feb 19 2009 at 6:35 PM Rating: Decent
***
1,882 posts
Yes, its not like PvPers have to wait for queues...ever...right?


Opening a new data center and migrating servers isn't as simple as paying someone a lump of cash, clicking, and all effected people suddenly can play. A lot more effort and planning goes into such a massive infrastructure.

Think of it like a big city. You can't simply say "we have congestion here, we're going to just widen the road".
no
# Feb 19 2009 at 12:46 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
****
4,445 posts
This is not acceptable. It is hard enough sometimes to form a group for a dungeon. Now because Blizzard is too cheap to upgrade and/or open more servers we have to wait in queue just to run a dungeon? That's stupid and if this becomes a major issue on my server I will be canceling my account.

Seems like Blizzards reward for being so successful is to ***** players with queues to log in, added lag due to large populations, and now waiting in another queue to run a dungeon. I can see it now spending an hour trying to get tank, heals. Finally go to run heroics and pop get this message. Healer gets mad and leaves, group disbands, no heroic.
____________________________
Hi
no
# Feb 19 2009 at 6:09 PM Rating: Decent
*
51 posts
fronglo wrote:
Finally go to run heroics and pop get this message. Healer gets mad and leaves, group disbands, no heroic.


You do realise that if you had kept trying for 1 minute maximum you'd have gotten in right? Seriously, instant gratification thinking is getting to a ridiculous point. Spoiled brats.
limitations
# Feb 19 2009 at 10:51 AM Rating: Good
***
1,882 posts
Even with a large income source, there is no such thing as unlimited bandwidth and unlimited performance. There are limitations.
limitations
# Feb 19 2009 at 2:36 PM Rating: Good
***
1,225 posts
ekaterinodar wrote:
Even with a large income source, there is no such thing as unlimited bandwidth and unlimited performance. There are limitations.

Each location will have its limits but, at least on EU servers, Blizzard has a number of different locations. According to Wowwiki.com there hasn't been a new data centre opened in the EU region since 2006, which seems counter-intuitive with the ever-increasing playerbase.

So far as I can tell, there's nothing to stop them opening up a new one and migrating some of the most crowded realms to the new location. It would be seemless for the players and it should reduce the need for instance throttling.
#REDACTED, Posted: Feb 19 2009 at 10:09 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) As much as they make every month this shouldn't even be a issue.
Lol
# Feb 19 2009 at 11:43 AM Rating: Default
Nitogs wrote:
As much as they make every month this shouldn't even be a issue.

Thinking that the issue is money raises the bar on stupidity. Someone would have to be beyond moronic to be stupider.
#REDACTED, Posted: Feb 19 2009 at 12:20 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Please get some better quotes off google before trying to insult somebody. Really was that the best you could come up with lol. Thanks for the laugh my guild has enjoyed it your our new 1st page idiot.
Lol
# Feb 20 2009 at 1:01 AM Rating: Decent
Nitogs wrote:
Please get some better quotes off google before trying to insult somebody. Really was that the best you could come up with lol. Thanks for the laugh my guild has enjoyed it your our new 1st page idiot.

Your guild is speaking about you (behind your back), if you are talking about a first-page second-class idiot! You would be a first-class idiot, but you aren't smart enough and failed the test.
Lol
# Feb 20 2009 at 9:06 AM Rating: Default
Another good google lookup but still falls short of anything worthwile. Whatever helps you to feel better and more confident in yourself. I am sure this is only place you can feel like your smart and try to make anybody else look stupid but like most who try, you fall short of your goal and just become a joke. So keep up the good fight to try and make yourseld seem smart and cool I am sure somebody someday will think you are and you might get a virtual pat on the back but wont be today.
Lol
# Feb 20 2009 at 3:54 PM Rating: Decent
Y' know, it's really funny that you can make ad hominem remarks (what the hell, I did, so you should be able to as well, right?), but cannot defend your (really stupid!) position that money will solve the problem. Why don't you try to explain in you own simpletonian way how Blizzard's money will solve the "Additional Instances not available" problem. Do you really think you have that good a handle on the technicalities involved in balancing a multi-threaded multi-processor array? Can you even attempt to identify what the problem might be so that Blizz can pour the "money bandaid" on it? That's what I meant by stupidity. It's more than not knowing. It's "knowing" that the problem is related to how rich Blizzard is.

edit: At the very least, try to explain why your original post was not stupid.

Edited, Feb 20th 2009 7:03pm by ohmikeghod
Lol
# Feb 22 2009 at 2:41 AM Rating: Decent
ohmikeghod the Venerable wrote:
At the very least, try to explain why your original post was not stupid.

I gave you quite a bit of time. I thought you wouldn't be able to, and I was right.
Post Comment

Free account required to post

You must log in or create an account to post messages.