Lack of SE Response to Lag

[Allyra]

If you're R0 and you're chainspell stunner, for example, you can wipe - Remember Dynamis Xarcabard when that was a tactic? What if your chainspell stunner R0s for 1 second and misses the stuns?

Just because XI is slower doesn't mean latency issues can't affect the gameplay.

1.You would have to flat out r0, which is different than having a constant 1 second lag.

2. I never said latency wouldn't effect gameplay, I said it wouldn't make the game unplayable. You didn't need to kill DL in order to gain Sky access for example. The game is designed slowly enough that even if you did get that one dude who r0'd and it messed things up, it was a rare occurrence, and people were able to just move on and succeed the next time.

Blizzard did what? Sign a service agreement with multiple ISP's for direct drops to the node over a pure fiber connection with their own racks where the ISP probably had the same thing done to a major node in the area? I'm pretty sure they did. I can't tell you 100% that they did, but if you can get me root access into their terminal(s) I can tell you.

Again, my point is, you can't hypothesize that one could do it, but the other couldn't. What would be so special about Blizz that they would do that (and as I stated would have HAD to do that back in 2004 for it to be true, as the lag was gone by then. I know this for a fact because I was playing it), yet somehow SE could not? Blizz in 2004 would have had the same amount of money.

Don't compare Blizz's profits they had during the 10 mil+ subscriber era to SE, when what you claim would have happened way wayyyyy before that.

TATA isn't even a T1 backbone in the US. They are T3 at best. Have you asked your ISP for a re route? They may be more inclined to re route around a T3 since they normally don't pull a whole lot of weight.

They don't care. Tata seems to be an easy port or something as TW isn't the only one that uses them.

I'm not invalidating your concerns, they are obvious to see. I just don't know what people expect Square to actually do. It's lose-lose for them:

3.) They can simply not say anything. Yeah, people will be upset and cause an uproar but at the end of the day, they are able to preserve their name as a business, not be held accountable for issues not their own, and avoid law suits.

If you think that not addressing customer issues preserves their name, you don't know enough of business. That is one of the major definitions of bad business.

I'm just as irritated as you at the latency issues and that there is no visible movement, but I have experience in the field and I know that Square's hands are pretty much tied in the situation

Again, they are not in regards to the actual structure of the game. If players can't play your game, regardless of whose fault it is, you do what you can to make the game playable.

If they really want to, they could make an offline dodge-intensive game to satisfy those people. The reality is the current internet world isn't built for that kind of content for a huge portion of players.