The server crashed today. The server always crashes. What's the big deal? What makes today's crash any different from the 100 other crashes over the last 4 years; most of which have come on major updates?
You're acting like Cryptic attacked you because they crashed the server. It's just a crash. It's not a personal assault on you in any way. In a couple of days everything will be patched and you'll never even remember this day existed. Really.
I like that you try to say I'm acting this or that just because you are saying it does not mean it is fact. prove it
Hi Captains. We're still working on bringing STO back up. Once we have an ETA to provide I'll be sure to post it here. Thanks for the continued support!
A quick ping test reveals the obvious falsity of this claim of "network issues". I have pinged all of the servers of the game. They DO, in fact, respond to pings, and what's more, those response times have never been better, perhaps because no one is actually on anymore.
As such, it is plenty obvious that the network is actually doing fine, and the fact that the response on the port is a flat out CONNECTION REFUSED indicates that the game daemon is simply DOWN.
This is NOT a network issue, the server program has CRASHED. If it were a network issue, I would be seeing terrible pings and connections not getting a response at all, not a prompt response from the server indicating it is not serving.
Hate to **** in your corn flakes dude, but this is like saying you can ping my modem and tell me that my computer is or isn't turned on.
If you're going to talk ****, know what you're talking about.
Network Admin Han Solo: Uh, everything's under control. Situation normal.
Community Manager BranFlakes: What happened?
Han Solo: [getting nervous] Uh, we had a slight equipment malfunction, but uh... everything's perfectly all right now. We're fine. We're all fine here now, thank you. How are you?
BranFlakes: Will we have the game back up soon?
Han Solo: Uh, uh... negative, negative. We had a data leak here now. Give us a few minutes to lock it down. Large leak, very dangerous.
BranFlakes: Who is this? What's your employee number?
Han Solo: Uh...
[Han shoots the intercom]
Han Solo: [muttering] Boring conversation, anyway. LUKE! IT'S THE COMPANY!
If only I could fit that into a sig, epic laffs! well done good sir.
since the servers are down for third time and we cant play, can you apply the maintance that you were going to apply tomorrow? this way we wont lose even more time playing our wonderful game.
Hi Captains. We're still working on bringing STO back up. Once we have an ETA to provide I'll be sure to post it here. Thanks for the continued support!
Hey here is a solution for Cryptic to avoid making people mad at them for these Server crashes.
After they add new content to the game just keep it down for 24-48 hrs to work out all the bugs. Seeing as how they can never keep the servers up longer then they are down for that period of time anyway.
I wouldn't mind if they ran the scheduled maintenance now rather than tomorrow if it will resolve some of the stability issues
They say time is the fire in which we burn. Right now, Captain, my time is running out. We leave so many things unfinished in our lives... I know you understand.
Okay I am saying this. Cryptic this is pathetic, I understand that the event ends on February 27th, but some of us dont have the time to just sit around and wait for this crud to stablize, so what are you going to do Cryptic? If this persist to a point where we can no longer within reason obtain enough of the "Qmendations" if at all, are you going to compensate us for what your unstable server robbed us off? I am not demanding compensation right now, I am asking for what you plan on doing if these crashes take to much time away from us.
Hate to **** in your corn flakes dude, but this is like saying you can ping my modem and tell me that my computer is or isn't turned on.
If you're going to talk ****, know what you're talking about.
That's precisely my point: If I ping your modem, I get a response, and you say your computer has crashed, I believe you. If you say that your network is broken, and I get a perfectly clean response from your modem (technically your router), I say you're lying, because there's nothing wrong with the network, your problem is that your computer is down. If your computer were truly down, I would be able to ping your modem, and then when I try to connect to the service port, I would get nothing, because your router would forward the connection attempt to your computer, and then it would disappear into the ether on the other side. This, too, I would believe. But when I get a connection REFUSED message, indicating that something there received my connection attempt, but explicitly rejected it on account of there being no program listening on that port? That is NOT a "network" issue.
And yes, I know exactly what I'm talking about: I run an internationally distributed server network of many different configurations, and when something goes down, I need to know what the hell I'm looking at and what kind of downtime I'm seeing. I've seen a LOT of various types of failures and know exactly where I should be filing crash reports. THIS kind of failure is not "network failure".
No, it is not. You're not actually getting a timeout trying to reach the login server, that's just the behavior of the client when it fails to get a connection.
What is ACTUALLY happening is that the client is repeatedly attempting to open a connection to the login server, and getting a Connection Refused TCP-RST, meaning nothing is listening on that port and the server is returning an explicit response to that effect.
The client, not programmed to process this particular response, just treats it the same as any kind of failure and repeatedly tries again until its own internal clock indicates it should give up.
This is readily apparent if you manually attempt to connect to the same IP and Port that the client is attempting to:
All network diagnostics indicate that the network is FINE. If it were truly a network issue, you would get very slow responses or high packetloss on pings/traceroutes. Even if it was an internal network issue, you would still get a connection from the front-end server, followed by a total absence of meaningful response from the backend (this doesn't necessarily indicate that it truly is a network issue, but it makes it POSSIBLE that this is true).
Instead, however, we get immediate flat refusal. The network is fine. The game has crashed. Now, I'm entirely understanding of the fact that they have no QA department and rush these things out on a deadline.
But I don't appreciate being lied to.
I'm NOT being sarcastic. I am asking because I don't know and I really do want to.
I read your post. I have to ask....
Let's say it IS a network issue. Can they (CRYPTIC) on their end, prevent anyone from signing on while they try to work out the issue and in doing so, possibly...POSSIBLY give you the result you are getting that indicates all is fine? I mean, if they aren't being flooded with people signing on, wouldn't it appear okay?
I was going to make a funny comment about the server randomly thinking it's the only thing in existence in the universe and link the TNG episode when Dr. crusher gets stuck in her own mind and the ships computer defines the universe as a small sphere around the enterprise.
Comments
I like that you try to say I'm acting this or that just because you are saying it does not mean it is fact. prove it
Cheers,
Brandon =/\=
"The Borg - party-poopers of the galaxy" ~ The Doctor
It's A Trap!
Hate to **** in your corn flakes dude, but this is like saying you can ping my modem and tell me that my computer is or isn't turned on.
If you're going to talk ****, know what you're talking about.
If only I could fit that into a sig, epic laffs! well done good sir.
Cheers,
Brandon =/\=
Look out...Duck!
uh
what??
After they add new content to the game just keep it down for 24-48 hrs to work out all the bugs. Seeing as how they can never keep the servers up longer then they are down for that period of time anyway.
I'd like to see BranFlakes make it his signature. It's probably not far off from some of the real conversations that man has had.....XD
Pretty sure they will do something, they always do.
How about an ETA on that ETA?
300 qmendations for everyone and all their characters.
or
50 lobi for everyone and all their characters.
you someone who likes when other people are silenced if they do not discuss things you approve of?
Legendary Final 5 Elite Fleet Leader
http://final-five.guildlaunch.com/
And yes, I know exactly what I'm talking about: I run an internationally distributed server network of many different configurations, and when something goes down, I need to know what the hell I'm looking at and what kind of downtime I'm seeing. I've seen a LOT of various types of failures and know exactly where I should be filing crash reports. THIS kind of failure is not "network failure".
But of course the 3rd patch currently downloading doesn't mean the authentication server is going to let me log in.
I'm NOT being sarcastic. I am asking because I don't know and I really do want to.
I read your post. I have to ask....
Let's say it IS a network issue. Can they (CRYPTIC) on their end, prevent anyone from signing on while they try to work out the issue and in doing so, possibly...POSSIBLY give you the result you are getting that indicates all is fine? I mean, if they aren't being flooded with people signing on, wouldn't it appear okay?
can't find just a small clip of that scene though so... ... have a bacon AK
http://www.sogoodblog.com/2009/04/15/bacon-gun/
You're depriving my cardiologist of a new boat, darnit!