I work with computers, networks and databases for more than 10 years now, included working for a #1 market leader which involved 1st and 2nd line support on those parts of IT.
So I am familiar with troubles on computernetworks and on databases.
I am also defending most developers, programmers and other technical engineers when end-users complain about problems in this complex area.
But on the other hand, Star Trek is a very highly respected name in the market.
********* -another F2P MMO which ended up in the Guinness Book of Records- never went down this much. And they also work with very complicated databases.
The same thing can be said for a product like Google or facebook. How often could end-users not use Google?
When was the last time you could not login on facebook?
The keyword on both products is redundancy.
To explain the word 'redundancy' without getting into technical terms:
nowadays it is possible to keep your services up and running for end-users if the hardware, alpha- and beta testing, maintenance etcetera is set up professionally.
You can take one server down for maintenance, while keeping your other servers running.
If that is not possible, it means that your maintence is technically bad planned or bad tested
(yes, maintenance also has to be tested...)
If you have to take 100% of your servers down to properly look into a problem as you state, that can only mean 2 things imo with my experience:
1) You have not set up your hardware and testing environment in such a way you can simulate your live environment
2) The devs find it more convenient to take down all servers then to do everything that is needed to keep the end-users satisfied and the product up and running.
I think this is really a matter of priority:
Do you want to do everything that is necessary to solve a problem asap, including taking 100% of your live environment down
Do you want to do everything that is necessary to keep your live-environment up and running and your (paying and non-paying) end-users satisfied?
I think the latter should be most important, but appearently the devs don't think so or can't make so.
Anyway, good luck solving it devs, and I hope redundancy will be a more important aspect in the near future because this product has a big potential and aside from the technical issues you are doing a pretty good job over there.
Thumbs up, fingers crossed.
The shard is currently offline. We are aware of the issue and working on a resolution.
Really?! You guys keep saying that but clearly, all you're doing is slapping a bandaid on it and not fixing squat! I don't care if you keep the servers offline for the rest of the damn day! FIX THEM PROPERLY!!!