103 replies to this topic

[Fergrim]

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.

Edited by Fergrim, 18 January 2013 - 06:32 AM.

[Ranzear]

With proper prediction and correction, which is mostly a well coded server, latency should not be an issue or even visible to 90% of players. The server looks at your ping and looks at when you fired your weapons on your end and rolls back the tape to check if you should have hit someone despite your latency.

Wanna know why Counter Strike was one of the most popular FPS ever? Because it was one of the first games with lag correction. What you shot is what you got. This is what MWO (rather, the current Crytek engine) lacks more than ten years later.

Edited by Ranzear, 18 January 2013 - 05:55 AM.

[Fergrim]

I don't think you're understanding the range that css can correct for. I run a counter strike source server for about four years now, a top ten office server, and you can't play that game or on my server at over 200 latency. You will without fail warp, you will without fail be forced to use a high capacity magazine to make up for the missing hit registration.

Just the same as in MWO when you're pushed to find that at least in a light mech, despite your warpiness, you are hard to hit and can stay alive longer despite your lag.


You can't program away a quarter of a second. You can try to correct for it, but you can't expect to be able to play with any smoothness, ever at over 200 milliseconds.

Quote

[color=#959595]Wanna know why Counter Strike was one of the most popular FPS ever? Because it was one of the first games with lag correction. What you shot is what you got. This is what MWO lacks more than ten years later.

[/color]

I'm going to guess you've never really played Counter Strike Source. All you hear is complaints about the broken hit registration in that game. So commonly that the phrase has been reduced to "reg" and generally it's bad or okay.

MWO has just as good if not better hit registration than CSS.

Edited by Fergrim, 18 January 2013 - 06:01 AM.

[Codejack]

OK, you simply don't understand the netcode problem.

Yes, latency can be an issue, and they really need to work on that, too, but the netcode problem gives you the same issues (rubberbanding, teleporting, etc) but it can happen with a ping as low as 50.

They are separate issues.

[xRaeder]

Codejack, on 18 January 2013 - 05:59 AM, said:

OK, you simply don't understand the netcode problem.

Yes, latency can be an issue, and they really need to work on that, too, but the netcode problem gives you the same issues (rubberbanding, teleporting, etc) but it can happen with a ping as low as 50.

They are separate issues.

I could give you and the OP a technical explanation as to why you are right... but I think someone can just check my post history for that.

[WhiteRabbit]

The funny thing is that i had jenners teleporting through srm-barrages that should have killed them...(btw they had a ping as low as 40.)

[Fergrim]

Okay, totally agree with you regarding the netcode needing the work that's being done on it. And that we will notice big improvements.

Just saying, that even once they fix the net code that they acknowledge needs fixing... half the population being from so far away that they can't ping under 200 will have to be addressed, by location specific servers.

At least a NA and a European.

Or else we'll still have half the people rubber banding all day. (I personally have never had an issue with lower latency mechs rubber banding, and usually can hit them reliably. So far whenever I can't hit that 3L and I check the score, he's the guy with 300 latency.

So since this is a beta tester forum and they've already acknowledged the netcode, but not the location/latency issue. I'd rather be bringing up a new issue rather than talking about the netcode.

Get me? :]

Edited by Fergrim, 18 January 2013 - 06:05 AM.

[Herbstwind]

they are going to introduce this kind of state rewind - it is stated in the netcode roadmap update :
http://mwomercs.com/...t-code-roadmap/

[Fergrim]

I read about that, and yes, it will help.

But still, no one has yet invented a netcode technology that would allow you to play at 200+ latency without being at a disadvantage for yourself and inconveniencing others. (Unless you're playing a slower paced RTS, not an action game that relies on moment to moment hit registration)

It's a seperate issue from netcode and can't be handled by enhancing the netcode. Although the negative effects can be softened, or hopefully focused on the lagging player while accurately reporting said players position to the non-laggy folks, it doesn't amount to a solution as much as a mitigation.

My main point however, you can't fix 200+ms with better netcode, give the euros their own server.

Edited by Fergrim, 18 January 2013 - 06:12 AM.

[l33tworks]

Fergrim, on 18 January 2013 - 05:58 AM, said:

I don't think you're understanding the range that css can correct for. I run a counter strike source server for about four years now, a top ten office server, and you can't play that game or on my server at over 200 latency. You will without fail warp, you will without fail be forced to use a high capacity magazine to make up for the missing hit registration.

Just the same as in MWO when you're pushed to find that at least in a light mech, despite your warpiness, you are hard to hit and can stay alive longer despite your lag.


You can't program away a quarter of a second. You can try to correct for it, but you can't expect to be able to play with any smoothness, ever at over 200 milliseconds.

[/font][/color]

I'm going to guess you've never really played Counter Strike Source. All you hear is complaints about the broken hit registration in that game. So commonly that the phrase has been reduced to "reg" and generally it's bad or okay.

MWO has just as good if not better hit registration than CSS.

Who said he was talking about counter strike source?

Counter strike on the half life 1 engine was like 1:1, best netcode game I have ever played. Each player also had the ability to customize their netcode settings on the fly via the console and could see their connection performance with a in game on screen graph.

When VAC secured servers came online cheaters were banned within hours afaik.

[Fergrim]

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.

Edited by Fergrim, 18 January 2013 - 06:16 AM.

[maxmarechal]

hum...not sure my norwegian friends are responsible for my lag....
we all want dedicated servers...including our aussie friends the other side of Earth!!!!but that means splitting the community.
And if OP is p****d about the situation he should try a game from France facing american teams with barely playable ballistics so huge is the difference when you play 200+ ping or 40+.....then he would really have a reason to complain about lag and ping...
we should be the ones complaining,but we do with what we get from PGI...
ever been to Norway? lovely place and nice people...

[Fergrim]

Yes! I love my European brothers, and on games like League of Legends, they can play on NA servers if they want.

But I think you all should band together and ask for your own server to play on as soon as they can, so you don't always have to be a team of 200ms'ers against american teams :]

You deserve fair fights, and from what it sounds like, it's not super fun from your end or ours.

But I agree about not splitting the community, however, I bet if you were given the option you'd enjoy both dedicated servers often enough to solve the problem for both of us.

[Lupin]

I am no programer but there are a number of reasons for bad game (Not including bad players/AFK).
High Ping rate from:
Lag from Server & Netcode (Due to overload or Netcode)
Lag from Player (Location of player and power of computer)
Bad ISP or connection

Not all of these problems can be fixed by game. Specially when you can deliberately lag your own computer.

So where does that leave MWO, auto kick when ping to high?

[Fergrim]

I don't know if I'd take it that far if I worked for PGI, I'd want to allow access to as many players as possible.

I think we've pin-pointed what we CAN do and we should focus on that.

1) Fix netcode (already being done)
2) Location specific servers, at least one for Europe and one for NA

[Chavette]

Its been a long time since I've seen something this stupid served as something that makes sense.

[KerenskyClone]

I agree with the OP. The EU needs its own servers. Common how expensive can it be to rent another set of servers in the EU??

[Aidan Malchor]

While I do think there is a bit of a netcode problem, I do think the OP is also right. Alot of people who are crying "Burn Netcode at the stake" could be high latency players. I generally have a ping of about 20-35 and I can count on 1 hand the number of times I've seen a teleporting light. I also don't have a problem (other then craptacular aim) hitting lights. On a good aim day, I annilated jenners and ravens with my triple UAC5 Muromets. There have been a couple instances of where I've nailed an raven, or jenner with a AC20 and nothing on their damage display even flashes. To me that looks like the netcode's fault.

[Thorqemada]

As commercial business you can not affort to not allow people playing from distances that bring a higher ping with them.
MWO has weaponsystems unaffected by netcode and ping but these weapons are condemned as "bad" by a few players that make some soundstorm in the forums about it.
Fundamentally a high ping must not be a problem neither for the high ping nor the low ping player.

[Herbstwind]

Localized servers are a nice enough idea but like it was pointed out in an earlier post it would mean splitting up the community.
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.

If the netcode fix solves some issues I would glady prefer having everyone who enjoys Mechwarrior and Battletech under one roof and live with some (hopefully minor ) lag issues. (but maybe servers on the eastcoast would be some sort of compromise for all? )

Edited by Herbstwind, 18 January 2013 - 06:44 AM.