why is having high ping an advantage in this game?
555
pennsylvania Join Date: 2016-09-16 Member: 222356Members
pennsylvania Join Date: 2016-09-16 Member: 222356Members
i regularly see people with 300+ ping topfragging because the netcode is designed in a way that you can shoot people around corners because they still see you there
this is literally the only fps game ever made where people with 300+ ping can even compete, and in a lot of situations actually gives you an advantage
this is literally the only fps game ever made where people with 300+ ping can even compete, and in a lot of situations actually gives you an advantage
Comments
Furthermore, the NS2WC showed that a low ping actually gives marines a huge advantage.
Considering this and the veil thread: Are you a troll?
Dammit 555, I was already handing out the pitchforks and torches
To learn about peekers advantage check out some youtube videos.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=peekers+advantage
[The simulate lag function in the engine locked behind sv_cheats imo]
No im talking about using net_lag command in combination with erratic movement to throw off the prediction/lag compensation of the engine.
Makes a retreating fade invincible.
1) Australia (Bruno) to the Server in (us_east or mid Eu) to Cr4zy in the UK. (should be around 250-300 ping on Brunos side and probly 20-100 from Cr4zy)
2) Australia (Bruno) to the Server in (us_east or mid Eu) to Frozen in the Usa (should be around 200-250 ping on Brunos side and probly 30-120 from Frozen)
So having a High ping you can land shots you should have never made on the screen on the other end of the world.
Those are cheat protected, so it's not really a problem?
@Absurdon I've played with that guy before, its frustrating as hell as he is using a satellite connection... which means the BEST case scenario is 600-1000 added latency. (28k miles into space and then back)
Ideally, NS2 should be adjusted to allow lag compensation up until about 220 ms... anything over that should require the player to predict like the days of old MP games, as the rest of us shouldn't have to deal with that level of a poor connection.
And everyone who feels like HPB's have an advantage.. remember that it's only while they are the attacker - if they are running away from you, or if you are attacking, you have that large advantage.
I don't notice immediately when peopple shoot at me which is quite devastating..., even if I do a perfect shotgun hit or track perfectly I still get hit one more time then I usually would... it made me simply more defensive and trying to have maximum distance at all times as marine...
So the people with high ping may actually be far better than you and simply play as defensively or cowardly as possible.. for example use others as human shields.. if you know what you're getting into.. just kill them before they come close to you
If you aren't used to it then of course your gameplay is going to suffer.
Those who are used to it know how to play (like being super aggressive) to get the lag to work for them.
In my experiences with NS2 it's extremely common to see a 300+ ping player with 30-40+ kills and less than half a dozen deaths... as they teleport around more than the crew of the starship Enterprise...
rekt tbh
It follows that if you are low lagged but _fighting_ high-lagged players, the same thing is true - be aggressive. In a high-lag fight, the more aggressive attacker wins.
Also note that damage only becomes real when your packets actually reaches the server. So the lower-lagged player will have an advantage because his damage reaches the server before the high-lag player does - and if you are dead by the time your hits gets registered by the server, they are discarded.
Do note that this assumes only high latency. High variation/loss can cause very erratic behavior - freezing/teleporting - which can make a target very hard to track. Theoretically, that could be fixed by tracking previous state and smoothing it into the new state, but ... lots of work and these days so few have that bad connections so it isn't really worth doing it.
Bw, it is kinda fun to dynamically adjust the size of the interp buffer (how far behind the server updates you are running, default 100ms); if you increase it smoothly with time you can get a slow-motion effect/matrix bullet time thing so you get more time to hit stuff.
Kinda fun but not very good for the game; dynamically adjusting your lag so you can freeze that alien before the corner and then leisurely line up your rail gun on a non-moving target ... nah. Kinda OP.
@matso - Sounds like one of my favorite old mods - The Specialists
How do I code this in exactly, lol :P
Oh, and you need to tell the server how much interp buffer each move is actually using, otherwise the server assumes 100ms, so your carefully lined up shot will miss with miles.
And then the server needs to save a lot more world states to allow it to go further back into history when it runs a frame ... that can actually be a problem for a 32-bit program, now that I think of it. Had a bit of a issue when I played around with that; the server ran out of memory when I adjusted it to save 3 seconds worth of world state.
So would have to wait for the 64 bit rewrite, I guess.
I just wondered because somtimes i go into console and see client interp 200 and wonder if thats the reason i was playing like trash.
and do you know when we'll be able to set client side moverate? or individual network commands?
edit:Also matso-kun can you fix demo playback/recording. playing back with less then 60fps causes slow motion and recording with a specific resolution means you need to play it back with same ratio as recorded in ie: 4:3 record @4
high ping marines still do a ton of damage to aliens before they even get notified of damage and before they can respond appropriately and save their lifeforms.
it goes the other way too, but the game doesn't stop working if aliens happen to perform well in melee combat by sneaking up on a marine. that's supposed to happen.
the default marine weapon shouldn't be an accurate ranged weapon. maybe they could give different starting guns to different players based on their latency.
and maybe aliens with high latency should be a little bit louder or something so they can't ambush and get a ton of damage in before marines even realize they're in the room.
i don't play NS2 enough anymore to know the exact best way to do that because every time i revisit the game i get frustrated at the awful netcode and stop playing. all i know is that it's been a problem since forever has only gotten worse as servers need players from the entire world to stay populated. they should look at reducing the frequency of the issue from a game design POV because it doesn't look like they're going to improve the netcode+latencies
The problem is in every FPS game (any multiplayer really where you both can see the same thing), is that there are 3 iterations of the game world. Your client, the server, and the other client you are shooting at. In CSGO, they were quite smart about this problem: When you get hit, you get a movement debuff to, what, 1/3 of your max speed? And your max speed is already very low, especially compared to ns2. So basicly, after you are hit, you cannot move behind a corner. Problem has thusly been solved through axioms/gamerules.
The problem does surface at times though. I recall an internet match where NIP were taking A on dust2, and someone was sitting behind the box, waiting for get_right to come from short. The player behind the box uncrouched to peek super fast, which the spectator was following - He was back down before get_right fired, but still died. Same thing. Happens in every game.
OW has some problems like this. Taking tracer as an example, whos quite fast, can take damage behind corners, but if tracer uses her movement ability, she cannot take damage during a certain time. Another axiom to combat this problem.
When a fade, fastest unit in ns2, moves around a corner, with its 18 units of speed, and a 150 ping dude fires an SG, you get some problems. If we replicate tracer, fades would be unkillable, adrenalin and shifts would be OP, as fades would always be trying to right click. Thus they would have to be nerfed health wise, because of their new survivability, but then their killpower goes down, as they can commit even less to engagements. Replicating CSGO is also out of the question. Speed is needed for aliens as they are melee, and their biggest advantages would be removed, making the marines biggest advantage of distance an insurmountable advantage.
In CSGO you can die to a headshot from an AK, or an AWP bodyshot - only if shot through cover can this be otherwise. It doesn't feel unfair imo - you could have killed them just as well as they could kill you (your POV is centered in your head - your bullets shoot out of your nose basicly). In NS2, this retaliation isn't available, which i guess is a reason to be annoyed, or feel unfairly treated by the game. A skulk peeking to parasite only to be killed by 10 rifle bullets, as the skulk peeks. Doesn't feel great. However - going technical - this would be called "forcing the parasite", which is never great, you need full health for when you get into melee distance, where you can kill. And therein lies the problem/the lack of justice, or atleast, the feeling of lack of justice. You can kill me and I cannot kill you.
The problems that every FPS game has, is very hard to minimalise, and NS2 cannot go with typical means of doing this, mainly due to the asymetrical team aspect of ranged vs melee. While it is possible to implement axioms, they will have huge consequenses, and will have huge impact on balance. I dont mean to claim dying around a corner is balanced - it should not happen - but it is what we have, until we either repolish the game from the bottom up, which would be a humongeous task, and propably would be too much effort to put into ns2, or we implement axioms that somehow can help against these problems. Otherwise, wish for good ping on your side, and the other players.
Boohoohoo. And the high pingers have to face that same threat from everyone on the server. And as their hits register later, they are at a disadvantage in a direct confrontation.
I'm curious as to how you expect UWE to improve latencies. Are they going to build the infrastructure so that everyone has a direct connection to the server? Are they going to pay for the best possible routing? I'm sure that will be very helpful although it will still be limited by sheer distance. I'm sure they can "improve netcode" by making it unplayable for people with high ping, although I'm unsure if even that will be a "reasonable level" for you. I'm also sure it will kill off a lot of servers. Maybe they should make this a turn based game. That will solve the ping issue.
Edit - Actually, they can put silence back to shade or just remove it entirely. Will solve a lot of problems with ping.
This includes propagation speeds through wires that are fast, but still not as fast as light, even if it were fiber optics throughout the entire route from you to the server. (cutting slower copper out of the equation for arguments sake - even though it's entirely unrealistic) This is because encoded signals have a lot of overhead. There is a lot of extra data transmitted with error correction, routing information, encryption and other protocol data in addition to the raw data. This overhead also slows down data throughput.
And then there's another slowdown from the amount of traffic on a network that can slow down the overall system speed as data gets dropped, collisions occur and data has to be resent.
And even then if networks around the world improve with new standards and new technology both physically and software wise, you're still limited by the speed of light. (which would only be about 36% faster than these impractical dream scenarios I've painted anyways.)
Essentially.. the scenario of true, instantaneous 1:1 realtime representation between two distant players is physically impossible until we harness quantum entanglement computing to achieve FTL communications.
Just food for thought, there.
Do you have a kickstarter?
So at best, we're only at that theoretical stage of hopes and dreams, with no other avenue to pursue other than Negative Matter (an exotic form of matter that's never been seen)
Sorry
There's not actually a disagreement here; It is not possible to use Quantum Entanglement for communication, because superluminal communication is forbidden by the principle of locality. Basically it doesn't work for exactly the reason you mentioned.
ehhh, in the traditional sense that quantum entanglement is used (from EPR and beyond), yes absolutely it is a fundamental restriction, despite claims that safely measuring can in fact change the state without breaking entanglement.. the issue then is a 50/50 probability.. which cannot be solved with the limited bandwidth in the application. Meaning, it can be used to communicate.. just not reliably. Similar to the behavior of a single photon shot at a mirror.. we cannot predict whether it will be absorbed, reflect, or pass through.
Another interesting experiment going on is testing the limits of quantum noise, to determine how fast you can go without breaking causality.
IronHorse, breaking causality doesn't even sound like science fiction, but more like fantasy. Causality may be studied within physics, but in my mind it is within a metaphysical realm. When I think of causality, I think of it in the framework of the Berserk graphic novel.
http://berserk.wikia.com/wiki/Causality.