375 replies to this topic

[Asakara]

I have been suffering from this issue since the peering announcement. Prior to that I did not have lag issues with MWO.

Sometimes it will be fine for a game or a bunch of games, my ping will be at 100-120 like it has been for the last 3 years. Then suddenly at the start of a game I will notice my ping be anywhere from 300-700 which is just nuts. Sometimes my ping will return to the normal 100-120 range the next game on its own.. Sometimes it wont for a while. If I Alt-F4 and rejoin the match in most cases it seems to fix the issue as well.

I did some tracerts and got some interesting results. Note 192.99.146.86:

Spoiler

192.99.146.86 belongs to Ovh hosting.

I do hope this gets resolved soon as I find it nearly impossible to be effective when I get hit by it.

Edited by Asakara, 12 January 2015 - 10:43 PM.

[Clit Beastwood]

IronClaws, on 12 January 2015 - 05:19 PM, said:

Pingzapper is only $30/year too.

yeah, and it works for more than just mwo - I prepaid a year after 2 hours of testing. I've been using pingzapper since a few weeks after the server move. It helped my abysmal hitreg - not 100% (I still score 20-30% higher damage when I played from work) but much better.

[BellatorMonk]

Same Bat Time, same Bat Channel. 100 ping for the day time and 500 ping after 10pm CST. Only to MWO site of course...

[Asakara]

I got Ping Zapper and paid for premium service. It made zero difference in my case. Even with it on I am still jumping from 100-120 ping to 300-700 ping in games.

Edited by Asakara, 14 January 2015 - 06:59 AM.

[LordSkippy]

Asakara, on 14 January 2015 - 06:48 AM, said:

I got Ping Zapper and paid for premium service. It made zero difference in my case. Even with it on I am still jumping from 100-120 ping to 300-700 ping in games.

That's because pingzapper is basically a VPN service, and using a VPN to route around a bad network node is a very hit or miss situation.

When you use a VPN, all your data traffic is routed through the VPN. So, all the data between you and the target server first goes between the target and the VPN's exit server (path 1), then through the VPN's internal network (path 2), then from the VPN's entry server to your machine (path 3). The hope is that the VPN service has an entry server close to you and an exit server close to the target, creating fewer hops through its internal network and routes you around the bad network node in the route your ISP uses to the target. However, if the bad network node is still in path 1 or 3, then it isn't going to help. Also, there could be even worse nodes in the path the VPN uses, or it could end up using a lot more hops, either of which could make your ping worse.

Your mileage WILL vary.

[Clit Beastwood]

Asakara, on 14 January 2015 - 06:48 AM, said:

I got Ping Zapper and paid for premium service. It made zero difference in my case. Even with it on I am still jumping from 100-120 ping to 300-700 ping in games.

It *does* take some fiddling, too - where are you located?
What pingzapper does, at least in this case, is tunnel it through port 443 which is higher priority than unidentified traffic, so it's less impacted by throttling. It's still possible that one of the peers you go through could just be overloaded. I'd recommend posting up a traceroute so perhaps we can be of some assistance. There's a freeware version of pingplotter that displays the data in a more visually appealing manner if command line isn't your style.

[Asakara]

Fierostetz, on 14 January 2015 - 08:38 AM, said:

It *does* take some fiddling, too - where are you located?
What pingzapper does, at least in this case, is tunnel it through port 443 which is higher priority than unidentified traffic, so it's less impacted by throttling. It's still possible that one of the peers you go through could just be overloaded. I'd recommend posting up a traceroute so perhaps we can be of some assistance. There's a freeware version of pingplotter that displays the data in a more visually appealing manner if command line isn't your style.

I posted up a traceroute in post 121 at the top of this page. In those images you can see it when everything is fine, when the spikes hit, and when it goes back to normal. The offending server is 192.99.146.86 owned by Ovh hosting.

[Dagorlad13]

Asakara, on 14 January 2015 - 10:02 AM, said:

I posted up a traceroute in post 121 at the top of this page. In those images you can see it when everything is fine, when the spikes hit, and when it goes back to normal. The offending server is 192.99.146.86 owned by Ovh hosting.

FYI, you should probably conceal your local IP address when posting those screen caps.

[Asakara]

IronClaws, on 14 January 2015 - 10:28 AM, said:

FYI, you should probably conceal your local IP address when posting those screen caps.

I thought I did as I blacked out the first seven hops. Is it showing somewhere, and if so, where?

[Dagorlad13]

Asakara, on 14 January 2015 - 10:54 AM, said:

I thought I did as I blacked out the first seven hops. Is it showing somewhere, and if so, where?

Looked at it again, you are right, carry on. :-)

[Kin3ticX]

Asakara, on 14 January 2015 - 10:02 AM, said:

I posted up a traceroute in post 121 at the top of this page. In those images you can see it when everything is fine, when the spikes hit, and when it goes back to normal. The offending server is 192.99.146.86 owned by Ovh hosting.

Thats what it looked like for me as well. However, in this case I think the traceroutes are deceiving because pings are getting hit by QoS different than the phenominon that is affecting MWO traffic. Also, the return route of our packets is different and does not show up on a tracert from the client to the datacenter.

[Clit Beastwood]

well different versions of traceroute use different traffic, UDP or ICMP, or sometimes TCP - you'll only see the returns from the appropriate protocol. Actual MWO gameplay is UDP if I remember correctly, so a) testing UDP specifically will give you the most accurate results, and making sure your VPN is set to tunnel UDP traffic will help. Pingzapper doesn't do all that well unless you check the "udp" box.

[Jon Cunningham]

Kin3ticX, on 14 January 2015 - 01:31 PM, said:

Thats what it looked like for me as well. However, in this case I think the traceroutes are deceiving because pings are getting hit by QoS different than the phenominon that is affecting MWO traffic. Also, the return route of our packets is different and does not show up on a tracert from the client to the datacenter.

Yep, exactly - a spiked ping on a hop doesn't necessarily mean anything.

It's whether the pings after it remain spiked, too. A router could easily decline to return responses to pings.

[JSmith7784]

I currently have TWC and have had it since the beginning of MWO. Before the server move my ping was usually in the low 30's. After the move my ping is now never lower then 50 and usually between 50-60. I know that's not bad but I do notice ping spikes, lag and occasional warping mechs. Also noticed days where my hit reg is great and others where it seems to be about 60%. Recently Verizon FIOS internet has been offered in my neighborhood. Would switching to FIOS help with my ping/hit reg?

[LordSkippy]

Ping spikes back up into the 300-400 range again tonight.

Google Fiber can't get here fast enough.

[LordSkippy]

Fierostetz, on 14 January 2015 - 01:35 PM, said:

Pingzapper doesn't do all that well unless you check the "udp" box.

Pingzapper doesn't allow UDP forwarding with the trial. The support page does say you can email them if the game you're testing it out for uses UDP for a "special arrangement".

[Clit Beastwood]

LordSkippy, on 14 January 2015 - 08:03 PM, said:

Pingzapper doesn't allow UDP forwarding with the trial. The support page does say you can email them if the game you're testing it out for uses UDP for a "special arrangement".

Weak, hadn't noticed since I just paid for it off the bat, good catch!

Jon Cunningham, on 14 January 2015 - 03:54 PM, said:

Yep, exactly - a spiked ping on a hop doesn't necessarily mean anything.

It's whether the pings after it remain spiked, too. A router could easily decline to return responses to pings.

What I'm seeing is increasing delays with larger packet sizes, that persist for hundreds of transmits.

[Dagorlad13]

I subbed to Pingzapper and my ping stayed between 90-106ms all night with no spikes using the Chicago server. I may try the New York server tonight.

[InspectorG]

I unfortunately have TWC. They have a monopoly in my area.
To me it seems they cut my bandwidth if my GF is online when i play.
Also, sometimes during 'prime time' i get cut even without 2 people using the interwebs.

I dont know if its technical or just that TWC is a crap company.
I hope its technical and someone finds a solution. it wasnt this bad before the server migration. I dunno...

[Dagorlad13]

InspectorG, on 16 January 2015 - 05:14 PM, said:

I unfortunately have TWC. They have a monopoly in my area.
To me it seems they cut my bandwidth if my GF is online when i play.
Also, sometimes during 'prime time' i get cut even without 2 people using the interwebs.

I dont know if its technical or just that TWC is a crap company.
I hope its technical and someone finds a solution. it wasnt this bad before the server migration. I dunno...

I use the router that TW gave me and I usually have four or five devices connected to it at any given time, but I have more than enough bandwidth when I use the 5G connection. I only had lag spike issues with MWO, since they moved the servers.