103 replies to this topic

[Ranzear]

Fergrim, on 18 January 2013 - 06:15 AM, said:

Gotcha, he could have been talking about CS1.6. :]

I think we settled our differences. And yes, Counter Strike source retained the ability to change your interpolation and other netcode stats on the fly. Up pipes and down pipes and such.

That's a golden era I fear won't come back ;]

But actual gameplay wise, I hit as often as I expect to in MWO still, unless it's against a fast, high latency mech.

'Over a decade ago' should have been your hint. CS:S isn't as loose with ping as classic CS was, and 200ms was totally playable on the predecessor. Hell that was rather normal at the time on casual servers. It just didn't make sense to keep it that loose as the broadband era came along, so CS:S is a little harsher on high ping.

You still wanted low ping for the 'who shot first' rulings as much as seeing someone come around a corner first, as this system was still centered around first action received taking precedent and you still needed the downstream to see who to shoot; it was just very fair on whether or not you hit someone.

Getting pings down won't help just yet. MWO is missing such basic things still, even sometimes just consistent client<>server sync which was the major issue that got collisions removed.

Edited by Ranzear, 18 January 2013 - 06:54 AM.

[Fergrim]

Edit: Dude above me, I understand and agree with where you're coming from. However, if we are to be fair and honest, you'd prefer to play at 60ms to 200ms and the reason is that even on CS 60ms performed much better for everyone involved. 150-200 was playable, but not preferable.

And YES, over a decade ago is a fine hint... but CSS came out about a decade ago also, so it's an ambiguous hint, and not even purposefully so

Yeah, and the way you stop it from being a problem for either player, is by stopping high pings and improving netcode to compensate for -relatively- high pings.

You don't do this by disallowing access, you do this by allowing more convenient access. IE adding service by geographical region.

You can't cancel out a ping, which is a physical thing, with good programming if that ping is very high. Although for the moderately high pings (120-150ms), netcode is everything. (And thank god they're fixing it)

But, and I restate this, no amount of netcode is fixing 250-300ms. Fixing the netcode will be freaking GREAT! But I don't think it excuses the terribly poor service that the europeans, aussies and others will be getting without their own dedicated regional servers.

Edited by Fergrim, 18 January 2013 - 06:58 AM.

[MaddMaxx]

The problem is a two-way street. The MWO server can only report back as fast as it receives the incoming packets from any one connection. I once read that once you have to traverse more than 5 (?) Hops to the destination, you will invariably experience response delays (lag) even on a fairly good network connection.

Breaking up the Community should not happen. We are Niche at best already, although I think MWO will continue to grow when further aspects are added in. I know, just myself, at least 20 very hard-core players, that are simply awaiting the arrival of CW.

Want to FIX the Internet, get on Facebook, Tweeter or whatever and tell your Gov't to get their **** together and put Fiber Optic backbones in from A to Z. There is no need for the human race to have to wait for Data transmission anymore ffs. This ain't no Star Trek, but we do indeed have "Speed of Light" technology...

P.S. I will be very interested indeed to see this "wind-back" code in action.

Edited by MaddMaxx, 18 January 2013 - 07:03 AM.

[Fergrim]

Quote

[color=#959595]Localized servers are a nice enough idea but like it was pointed out in an earlier post it would mean splitting up the community.[/color]
[color=#959595]At this point this may not mean much to many players, but since MWO is the first 'big thing' in Battletech since years now and some of the old units and stables from earlier games are just reassembling and hiring new pilots, it can hurt the game as well to split the people up again[/color]

I agree with this caution against splitting up an already niche community. However, if they had the resources to launch a Euro server, they wouldn't necessarily have to force people to use their region's server... players would either prefer low ping, or to play with their friends and could choose accordingly (however, each server would hold a different account/information).

Since they can't have both, and they don't have the option to choose now, it'd be nice to give it to them.

Edited by Fergrim, 18 January 2013 - 07:06 AM.

[Ranzear]

MaddMaxx, on 18 January 2013 - 07:02 AM, said:

P.S. I will be very interested indeed to see this "wind-back" code in action.

Go play almost any multiplayer FPS made in the past 14 years.

[MaddMaxx]

Ranzear, on 18 January 2013 - 07:08 AM, said:

Go play almost any multiplayer FPS made in the past 14 years.

I meant for MWO. FPS's are not my bag.

[Codejack]

MaddMaxx, on 18 January 2013 - 07:02 AM, said:

The problem is a two-way street. The MWO server can only report back as fast as it receives the incoming packets from any one connection. I once read that once you have to traverse more than 5 (?) Hops to the destination, you will invariably experience response delays (lag) even on a fairly good network connection.

Breaking up the Community should not happen. We are Niche at best already, although I think MWO will continue to grow when further aspects are added in. I know, just myself, at least 20 very hard-core players, that are simply awaiting the arrival of CW.

Want to FIX the Internet, get on Facebook, Tweeter or whatever and tell your Gov't to get their **** together and put Fiber Optic backbones in from A to Z. There is no need for the human race to have to wait for Data transmission anymore ffs. This ain't no Star Trek, but we do indeed have "Speed of Light" technology...

I am 4 hops, usually get <70ms ping, and I live in the town with the fastest Internet speed in the Western hemisphere (no less than 5 major trunks connect here), but I still get the netcode problem.

If it is a problem with the regional Internet speed, it is not on the customers end.

[OGFAMINE]

Not sure about this game but I have played some games in the past where the ping was reported as the entire round-trip from client to server and back to client. This makes the number seem really big. Some clients only report a one-way trip for the ping from client to server. This results in a smaller number. Do we know if this game reports full round-trip or just one-way ?

[Grimnir79]

I'm from Norway and my Ping is in the 100-120 range. But of course, not everyone has a fast connection. Really wish PGI would put up some european servers eventually.

[Fergrim]

See! The europeans are asking for it!

Proof I was on to something.

Clarity: I'm not saying don't fix the netcode, add a Euro server...

I'm saying

PLEASE fix the netcode

AND THEN ADD A EURO SERVER TO ACCOMODATE ALL THE NEW PLAYERS WE GET WITH A FIXED NETCODE.

As the above poster pointed out, this rewind feature has been around a while and high pings for distant players will still be awful and affect their game experience. Everyone in the world wants to play this game, regional servers would only help.

Edited by Fergrim, 18 January 2013 - 07:24 AM.

[Shismar]

OGFAMINE, on 18 January 2013 - 07:13 AM, said:

Not sure about this game but I have played some games in the past where the ping was reported as the entire round-trip from client to server and back to client. This makes the number seem really big. Some clients only report a one-way trip for the ping from client to server. This results in a smaller number. Do we know if this game reports full round-trip or just one-way ?

Round trip. Just like the ping command.

The game is well playable with a 200ms ping but it helps to load a couple lock on weapons and pulse lasers. I would prefer a EU server, even though it would only halve my ping to ~ms, depending on location. And best I'd like to have a direct fibre line from the Canary Islands to the US instead of taking multiple km detour over Spain so I can play the US server with a good latency. I guess, asking for EU servers is more promising ...

There will always remain issues with high latencies but game experience can certainly be improved by better netcode. Lets hope the first incarnations of this come soon. This is beta in some sense so I am really fine with testing early code and accept that there may be rollbacks if it does not work out.

[Tasorin]

You are partially correct. Some of the issue is Latency due to distance and route that packets travel between your client and the server. It is part latency due to the time it takes the server side calculations to take place and generate results before it sends packets out.

But that is where the latency discussion end. The majority of the problem is net code, and not all the net code issues are PGI's code. The CryEngine 3 and its net code is causing a portion of the problem that PGI can't control. In the back rooms there have been glimmers of information that there hasn't been a lot of robust communication going on that actually solves problems and delivers results between PGI and Crysis. This is part of the reason it is taking so long for PGI to develop and implement fixes for Movement, Fire Delay, Hit Box Tracking and Hit Detection which would address a fair percentage of the current lag shield problems.

You have been fed now Space Poors.

[Mechteric]

I have a ping of around 40ms and I still have to lead fast light mechs quite a bit even with lasers. So trust me, latency isn't entirely the issue, but a sub-issue.

[zmeul]

maxmarechal, on 18 January 2013 - 06:15 AM, said:

we all want dedicated servers...including our aussie friends the other side of Earth!!!!but that means splitting the community.

what community mate?
I'm already not playing and I do believe a lot of people with hi ping put the game on hold too

the "not playing community" wants regional servers to be able to play and enjoy the game without seeing warping mechs and lag shielded lights


the netcode is viewed as no1 priority by the players, but not by PGI
how come?

Edited by zmeul, 18 January 2013 - 07:44 AM.

[Mechteric]

zmeul, on 18 January 2013 - 07:43 AM, said:

the netcode is viewed as no1 priority by the players, but not by PGI how come?

it is, read around

Edited by CapperDeluxe, 18 January 2013 - 08:09 AM.

[Nightfangs]

Fergrim, on 18 January 2013 - 05:49 AM, said:

Okay, since we've all started playing games, we've all known that a ping much higher than 100 for any action game is going to be awful for said game.

In a usual game that I join, I see at least a third of the latencies in the range of 180-200. Lag shielded mechs are not shielded by the netcode, they are shielded by the fact that their pilot is in freaking Norway! Personally, I wouldn't even play if my minimum achievable ping were in the 250's and 300's like with many players I see. I feel their insistence on "slogging through" by picking a light mech is practically a purposeful act of trolling.

No amount of fixes to the netcode will make an action game such as this playable if they keep putting us on the same servers with Europeans and even many South Americans. I would say non-North Americans are about a third of the player base. So your net code isn't broken so much as your game designed for low-latency situations is getting ********* by a plague of light mech wielding laggers.

Please give them their own server, they would prefer to have lower pings, and we here in the states would get less frustrated laggers just using a light mech because it's so not fun play at above 300ms anyway. They're breaking the beta by lagging so hard.

It's not lag shielded ravens you hate, it's Norwegian ones.

Yet, some know-it-alls claim that it doesn't make a difference whether you have a 20 or a 400 ms latency.
Therefore, we don't need more server regions.
Just learn to play!

[Jacmac]

Fergrim, on 18 January 2013 - 06:03 AM, said:

So far whenever I can't hit that 3L and I check the score, he's the guy with 300 latency.

State Rewinding should eliminate this problem, a lot of online FPS type games do this. It's pretty much required unless everyone playing has the same ping or very low ping.

[Deamhan]

I haven't played CS:S but I have played both DoD and DoD:S. I know of the lag correction and I think it would help this game greatly. It kinda sucked being on the receiving end though. You get around the corner of a building to die by someone who is back around that corner simply because on their screen, you weren't yet around that corner.

But otherwise, wouldn't having a high ping hinder the person with it? If the above correction wasn't there, the person who shot would be the one frustrated because on their screen, they shot the enemy but due to ping, there was a short delay in firing. Pair this with the fact that the person they shot at is already ahead of where they see them and they will miss. This should effect the person with the high ping, not the people with low pings. Yet in MWO, it's the ping of the fast light mech that puts his actual location ahead of his seen one as seen by everyone else with a good ping?

Though I think I know of a counter to this. Having a high ping too. I have a ping that sits around 100 and I have no problem hitting the lights with their 150+ ping without having to lead them all that much.

[zmeul]

CapperDeluxe, on 18 January 2013 - 08:09 AM, said:

it is, read around

I read the coomand chair, and frankly ... I'm laughing
it's close to 2 months from the moment they even publicly admitted the issue
also they say it's their no1 priority, yeah right

[Gaan Cathal]

IronEagle, on 18 January 2013 - 08:21 AM, said:

Watch a circling Raven with ping 60 or below and your teammates with same ping.
They don't hit the Raven more often or better. The hit detection is some kind of broken
for anything faster than 100km/h. Must be the engine, thats why they are working on it.

It's been stated before in various places that there is a Cryengine3 issue with speeds in excess of ~100km/h, this is the netcode issue until proven otherwise (i.e. if the Cryengine3 issue is solved and there is still an issue, it will become apparent then). The amusing thing about half the ranting and raving on the forums is the general assumption that PGI introduced the issue in the first place, when if it's anyone's 'fault' it's Crytek's. Or whomever decided that BT mechs could exceed 100km/hr. Either way, engine limitations aren't something you can snap your fingers and disappear, especially when you didn't write the engine.

Deamhan, on 18 January 2013 - 08:39 AM, said:

I haven't played CS:S but I have played both DoD and DoD:S. I know of the lag correction and I think it would help this game greatly. It kinda sucked being on the receiving end though. You get around the corner of a building to die by someone who is back around that corner simply because on their screen, you weren't yet around that corner.

There's also this. There's plenty of rage on BF3 comms when folks duck behined a concrete wall only to get their head blown off.

[rant]
But light mechs are, of course, the spawn of *****, or possibly ******/osama/kim jong un - whatever the case they are decidedly unamerican, or something, so the game would be much better if the imbalance were simply reversed and lights became impossible to pilot through fire. Or possibly a lot of people on the internet are entitled manchildren who's every error is bad code, hax, OP mechs, UP weapons or some other factor entirely outside their control.[/rant]



Edit: How about ******? Mussolini? Bush?

Edited by Gaan Cathal, 18 January 2013 - 08:55 AM.