I won't dislike you. I consider a dislike an inferior alternative to a reasoned rebuttal. Herewith the rebuttal.

One bottom-line reason for SBS not using Improbable's services was to benefit players' bottom lines, that is, save us money. The relatively high fees that Improbable would need to charge would be passed on to us, through increases in the price of sparks and souls most likely. Another major reason was that Improbable decided to stop supporting the interface for the language that SBS uses. The language was chosen for specific developmental reasons, probably speed and ease of use. Changing away from that would have been expensive and would have increased costs and delayed development of the game. The current pre-alpha friends-and-family would have been delayed, and from that everything down the line would have been delayed.

Much, perhaps most, of the performance that Improbable is able to obtain relies upon Amazon Cloud Services. AMS is available to anyone at similar terms to what Improbable has. If I read my tea leaves correctly, SBS intends to use AMS. The reason I believe that is because the ping calculator actually tests latency to AMS portals. So, my informed guess is that SBS was confident that it could functionally duplicate the Improbable services that it intends to use for less net cost than the fees for those services would cost down the line, and was also confident that it could do so with less net loss of time than it would take to switch development languages.

Improbable was not supporting their choice of programming language so that was a big deal, among several other things.

Caspian took the time and explained a lot of the broader technical details and advantages, and given his background, I'm confident it was the right move for SBS and the players alike.

As the lawyer in me wants to say: Asked and answered, next question!

Not everything that SbS puts forth is going to be liked 100% of the time by members of the community. This is particularly true in this case where we, the community as a whole, likely lacks the complete scope of what Improbable really brought to the table V. What SbS is bringing to the table with the steps they took.

To address your other aspect about paying maintenance fees: SbS might have to pay maintenance fees it may not have to have paid in the past due to their tie with improbable. However, they also no longer have to pay for the use of SpatialOS.

The main point I am making is that there are many factors some of which were brought to our attention (and some that we likely do not know the details on) that led to the decision that was made.

Either-way, thanks for sharing your thoughts and concerns and I hope you have yourself a wonderful rest of your day.

Posted By radkid at

the game is not going to be able to handle 1000 plus players on the battlefield

they should have stayed with improbable because of the redundancy system they had with their server Network would have been useful to them but no they rather build that from scratch which means less money going into the game and more money going to hardware.

on EVE Online the largest battle I have ever participated in was 5600 + players in one solar system but took 14 hours don't expect a battle even at 25% of that being possible in Chronicles of Elyria without massive failure to be able to handle something like that you probably will have to spend 13mill on Hardware which you don't have

improbable also has a deal with Amazon and Google with their cloud services you don't have to pay for them till you start making money on the game itself so you would have unlimited time to test

now you have to pay for the maintenance and replacement of parts for your own Hardware it would have been cheaper to go through them cuz if there was any problems less than 15 minutes they would have updated the server Network and gave you a new server to use.

the redundancy that technology offered was the reason why you guys should have stuck with it

i expect to be disliked off this planet

How to get dislikes 101 - go to the forums and express opinions how you do not believe in some element of this game.

So what I suggest is just taking a step back, and letting the devs do what they need to do, they will do whats best and do so with whats possible. I have full faith they will make the game great and it will be fine.

Posted By radkid at

the game is not going to be able to handle 1000 plus players on the battlefield

they should have stayed with improbable because of the redundancy system they had with their server Network would have been useful to them but no they rather build that from scratch which means less money going into the game and more money going to hardware.

on EVE Online the largest battle I have ever participated in was 5600 + players in one solar system but took 14 hours don't expect a battle even at 25% of that being possible in Chronicles of Elyria without massive failure to be able to handle something like that you probably will have to spend 13mill on Hardware which you don't have

improbable also has a deal with Amazon and Google with their cloud services you don't have to pay for them till you start making money on the game itself so you would have unlimited time to test

now you have to pay for the maintenance and replacement of parts for your own Hardware it would have been cheaper to go through them cuz if there was any problems less than 15 minutes they would have updated the server Network and gave you a new server to use.

the redundancy that technology offered was the reason why you guys should have stuck with it

i expect to be disliked off this planet

wait, you do not even have a rank, does that mean you do not even have a package ?

Did you come here to spread negativity ?

They could easily make it 50-100 players per grid/parcel and load balance via cells and share info on whats viewed around you/adjacent to you within a limit of x radius and problem solved.

Posted By radkid at

the game is not going to be able to handle 1000 plus players on the battlefield

they should have stayed with improbable because of the redundancy system they had with their server Network would have been useful to them but no they rather build that from scratch which means less money going into the game and more money going to hardware.

on EVE Online the largest battle I have ever participated in was 5600 + players in one solar system but took 14 hours don't expect a battle even at 25% of that being possible in Chronicles of Elyria without massive failure to be able to handle something like that you probably will have to spend 13mill on Hardware which you don't have

improbable also has a deal with Amazon and Google with their cloud services you don't have to pay for them till you start making money on the game itself so you would have unlimited time to test

now you have to pay for the maintenance and replacement of parts for your own Hardware it would have been cheaper to go through them cuz if there was any problems less than 15 minutes they would have updated the server Network and gave you a new server to use.

the redundancy that technology offered was the reason why you guys should have stuck with it

i expect to be disliked off this planet

I am a bit confused here. SBS has not said "We are going to host this ourselves using our own hardware." They have said that they are going to build their own tool stack in order to run the game. The new tools selected, can be run on the hardware or cloud infrastructure of their choice.

The tools that were selected are quite well known and have been used by other companies to create very scalable systems. The hosting infrastructure is likely to be cloud based, but to my knowledge they haven't stated which one (and they probably have yet to fully commit, although I suspect they have a good idea of which service they are likely to use). At that point, the hardware side of system scaling is pretty much dependent upon how much they are willing to spend to rent space.

This is really no different than the arrangement with spatialos, except that SBS was indirectly renting server infrastructure through them instead of directly from a cloud provider.

@Radkid Sorry you were trolled. Maybe just keep to responding to the reasoned rebuttals above.

for what it is worth: Rank 1 is forty bucks I believe.

Once again an expert who had not pledged in the 2+ years here is sharing his expertise with us. What type of person belongs to this site that long and makes 123 posts but never pledges? Oh please tell us great wise one, when is Jesus coming back? Might you share with us the cure for cancer while your at it? I mean these things you must know as well as you seem an expert in all things you know nothing of.

No, you don't need to pledge $300 but a much smaller amount would have given you a rank and you could of easily have done it by now. See, a lowly rank one pledge makes you saying something like this a concerned citizen. No pledge at all makes you look like a troll.

Posted By radkid at

the game is not going to be able to handle 1000 plus players on the battlefield

they should have stayed with improbable because of the redundancy system they had with their server Network would have been useful to them but no they rather build that from scratch which means less money going into the game and more money going to hardware.

on EVE Online the largest battle I have ever participated in was 5600 + players in one solar system but took 14 hours don't expect a battle even at 25% of that being possible in Chronicles of Elyria without massive failure to be able to handle something like that you probably will have to spend 13mill on Hardware which you don't have

improbable also has a deal with Amazon and Google with their cloud services you don't have to pay for them till you start making money on the game itself so you would have unlimited time to test

now you have to pay for the maintenance and replacement of parts for your own Hardware it would have been cheaper to go through them cuz if there was any problems less than 15 minutes they would have updated the server Network and gave you a new server to use.

the redundancy that technology offered was the reason why you guys should have stuck with it

i expect to be disliked off this planet

So you're saying you have detailed information on ALL aspects of hardware and software currently being used and planned to be implemented in future for the launch if CoE?

While you don't have to be rich or buy a package to have an opinion, the least you could do is get ALL the facts rather than just pulling a bunch of assumptions out your ass!

But lets not let facts get in the way of assumptions, speculation and heresay. Why should the truth really matter?

It may or may not work but my issue here is your perceived right to say whatever you like whenever you like regardless of facts and how your potential misinformation may have unjustified negative consequences on others.

Posted By RedDoggybone at 9:49 PM - Wed Feb 07 2018

Once again an expert who had not pledged in the 2+ years here is sharing his expertise with us. What type of person belongs to this site that long and makes 123 posts but never pledges? Oh please tell us great wise one, when is Jesus coming back? Might you share with us the cure for cancer while your at it? I mean these things you must know as well as you seem an expert in all things you know nothing of.

No, you don't need to pledge $300 but a much smaller amount would have given you a rank and you could of easily have done it by now. See, a lowly rank one pledge makes you saying something like this a concerned citizen. No pledge at all makes you look like a troll.

I don't think we should be setting a precedent that people with criticism who haven't spent money on the game should be considered trolls and swept under the rug.

^ Cannot reinforce this enough. Someone who hasn't backed could be as passionate and well-read on the game as a king-level backer, but simply not have the means to back the game or the inclination until there's more on the table to back. Let's not be attacking people for expressing doubt simply because they don't hold a pledger rank.

@OP, I'm another who's worried about the move away from SpatialOS. However, the team's displayed good sense in most of the moves/changes I've seen them make so far, and in the same portion of the update they mentioned dropping SOS they also claimed they have a toolkit that effectively does everything SOS does. I mostly trust that claim, and am waiting until alpha 2 to see how the game performs before I give any further credence to doubt on the matter.

Posted By Wolfguarde at 2:05 PM - Thu Feb 08 2018

^ Cannot reinforce this enough. Someone who hasn't backed could be as passionate and well-read on the game as a king-level backer, but simply not have the means to back the game or the inclination until there's more on the table to back. Let's not be attacking people for expressing doubt simply because they don't hold a pledger rank.

@OP, I'm another who's worried about the move away from SpatialOS. However, the team's displayed good sense in pretty much every move I've seen them make so far, and in the same portion of the update they mentioned dropping SOS they also claimed they have a toolkit that effectively does everything SOS does. I mostly trust that claim, and am waiting until alpha 2 to see how the game performs before I give any further credence to doubt on the matter.

This is a great example of 1 way concerns could be raised, invite feedback, ask questions and gain a deeper understanding in order to form a sound opinion and possible resolve concerns

If your entire argument hinges upon how you like to play spreadsheets in space, and the rest is mindless doomsaying with no solid factual evidence, that's the part that makes people not respect your opinion more than the fact that you haven't contributed anything.