Hit Detection

Comments

  • misisipiRivrRat
    801 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member

    High latency isn't so much the problem when it comes to "server performance". Jitter and packet loss are more the issue in this regard.

    Jitter is the fluctuation of latency. All connections have jitter. There's low variance where the latency rarely changes, yet when it does it's only by a few ms, then it resettles back to it's normal base low. Then there's high variance latency in which the latency value is for the majority of the time always changing.

    e.g.
    Low variance (10 second interval) - 200ms base low
    200ms -> 200ms -> 200ms -> 200ms -> 200ms -> 205ms -> 200ms -> 200ms -> 200ms -> 200ms......... minimal/occasional low spiking

    High variance (10 second interval) - 30ms base low
    30ms -> 42ms -> 35ms -> 73ms -> 31ms -> 104ms -> 48ms -> 56ms -> 55ms -> 30ms etc........... constant variable spiking

    A "stable" latency of 200ms will not cause server issues, desync etc. A whole team of 200ms players won't do that either. The only issues you'll run into hitreg wise in this scenario are the norm death/hits behind cover (delayed damage receival), hits not registering (HP advantage), players warping at times (interpolation correction).

    Introduce a few high variance connections and the wtf oddities intensify.
    • increased number of death/hits behind cover
    • increased number of hits not registering
    • increased rubberbanding, warping
    • 1 hit kills (bundled damage)
    • server wide desync
    • hackusations galore

    Now in respect to very high "stable" connections (300ms +) there starts to be a problem with general offset. The latency differences alone (30 vs 300) start affecting general game play. More accurately the tick offset. ((latency / 2) / 16.66) = tick offset. A 30ms player is in a 1 tick offset which is the lowest you can be. A 300ms has an offset of 9 ticks. You can equate a tick as a frame.

    Realistically speaking you'll probably never come across a "stable" 200ms or higher connection. The further the distance to the server, the higher chances of datagram fragmentation. Fragmentation == loss => increased jitter
    Also with regards various latencies what would you say is an optimal latency gap from lowest on server to highest?

    In my opinion the optimal setup would be all player with 0-1% loss, 0-0.5% variance. Latency would max at a 3 tick offset (99.96ms). 30ms or lower for 1 tick offset.

    Thus the initial 100ms HP threshold.
    If someones say 30 and theres a few players 125+ would you say it will be a difference that can cause problems?
    The collective sum of jitter and packet loss across all connections determines the overall performance.

    Thanks for the reply had to reread a few times to get my head around it but I may be there somewhat.

    Basically a number of players with high latency will give a few as you call them the norm issues but its when you add in high variance connections ( regardless of latency ? ) that the wtf oddities start.

    For a decent game it what be optimal to have all players latency between 30 - 100 ( or a range so all within 3 ticks ) and if possible all with low variance. I did watch some of the latencies on the scoreboard and the higher ones seem to jump in larger gaps than the lower ones.

    Taking the above into account then why isnt the following being implemented within the game:

    Latency tick brackets to keep all players within 3 ticks based on their average.

    Not sure if this ones possible or if its done within the gaming industry but cant low/high variance be separated to some kind of level within the game?

    Would like to think if your playing with a low latency and a fairly low stable variance then why should your experience be ruined by being placed on a server with people at the other end of the scale.

    That's what lots of us want to know, your last question that is.
  • VBALL_MVP
    6177 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    But it's not just high latency players that can have variance. There are many people who have low latency and lots if variance. I would argue you see more of that than the former.
  • Rev0verDrive
    6722 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Thanks for the reply had to reread a few times to get my head around it but I may be there somewhat.

    Basically a number of players with high latency will give a few as you call them the norm issues but its when you add in high variance connections ( regardless of latency ? ) that the wtf oddities start.

    High Variance, regardless of latency is what causes the more frustrating wtf moments. Low ping with high variance has the same negative effect on the server as does high ping with high variance.

    A 7ms player that constantly spikes to 45, 50, 60ms is no better than a 200ms player that spikes to 250-380ms. The instability of both connections are the problem and the causes of server wide wtf's.

    A player with 10Mbps fiber connection pulling a 7ms ping to the server, but also having 3 family members downloading videos, surfing the net, 5 phones pinging etc will result in more issues server-side than a 200ms player with low variance.

    Couple these garbage connections with sporadic packet loss and everything goes to @#$%.

    Higher variance will result in higher packet loss. Packet resends result in player warps (interpolating), bundle damage (1 hit kills), getting stuck on objects (false physics collisions) etc.
    For a decent game it what be optimal to have all players latency between 30 - 100 ( or a range so all within 3 ticks ) and if possible all with low variance. I did watch some of the latencies on the scoreboard and the higher ones seem to jump in larger gaps than the lower ones.

    A perfect setup would be as stated previously (all players on the server):
    • Latency: between 0 - 99.96ms
    • Lat Variation: 0-0.5%
    • Packet loss: 0-3%

    Having a couple players going above that ... say 4/5 tick offset, but maintaining the low lat var and packet loss, there shouldn't be a problem.

    Typically latencies over 200ms will have at least a medium level of variance. Yet this is dependent on the network routes to the server and the servers datacenter location.
    Taking the above into account then why isnt the following being implemented within the game:

    Latency tick brackets to keep all players within 3 ticks based on their average.

    Not sure if this ones possible or if its done within the gaming industry but cant low/high variance be separated to some kind of level within the game?

    Would like to think if your playing with a low latency and a fairly low stable variance then why should your experience be ruined by being placed on a server with people at the other end of the scale.

    Latency tick brackets...
    A very large portion of the community (purchasers) wouldn't be able to play multiplayer. There aren't enough server locations to accommodate low ping stable play. This is the main reason the High ping threshold was raised from 100ms to 160ms (US/EU) and 200ms elsewhere.

    Same applies for isolating low/high variance players. You'd join a friend and 3 minutes later you're kicked.

    It's all about having more server locations. They already provided RSP renters a ping kicker set at 100ms. Official servers can't run it though.
  • misisipiRivrRat
    801 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Thanks for the reply had to reread a few times to get my head around it but I may be there somewhat.

    Basically a number of players with high latency will give a few as you call them the norm issues but its when you add in high variance connections ( regardless of latency ? ) that the wtf oddities start.

    High Variance, regardless of latency is what causes the more frustrating wtf moments. Low ping with high variance has the same negative effect on the server as does high ping with high variance.

    A 7ms player that constantly spikes to 45, 50, 60ms is no better than a 200ms player that spikes to 250-380ms. The instability of both connections are the problem and the causes of server wide wtf's.

    A player with 10Mbps fiber connection pulling a 7ms ping to the server, but also having 3 family members downloading videos, surfing the net, 5 phones pinging etc will result in more issues server-side than a 200ms player with low variance.

    Couple these garbage connections with sporadic packet loss and everything goes to @#$%.

    Higher variance will result in higher packet loss. Packet resends result in player warps (interpolating), bundle damage (1 hit kills), getting stuck on objects (false physics collisions) etc.
    For a decent game it what be optimal to have all players latency between 30 - 100 ( or a range so all within 3 ticks ) and if possible all with low variance. I did watch some of the latencies on the scoreboard and the higher ones seem to jump in larger gaps than the lower ones.

    A perfect setup would be as stated previously (all players on the server):
    • Latency: between 0 - 99.96ms
    • Lat Variation: 0-0.5%
    • Packet loss: 0-3%

    Having a couple players going above that ... say 4/5 tick offset, but maintaining the low lat var and packet loss, there shouldn't be a problem.

    Typically latencies over 200ms will have at least a medium level of variance. Yet this is dependent on the network routes to the server and the servers datacenter location.
    Taking the above into account then why isnt the following being implemented within the game:

    Latency tick brackets to keep all players within 3 ticks based on their average.

    Not sure if this ones possible or if its done within the gaming industry but cant low/high variance be separated to some kind of level within the game?

    Would like to think if your playing with a low latency and a fairly low stable variance then why should your experience be ruined by being placed on a server with people at the other end of the scale.

    Latency tick brackets...
    A very large portion of the community (purchasers) wouldn't be able to play multiplayer. There aren't enough server locations to accommodate low ping stable play. This is the main reason the High ping threshold was raised from 100ms to 160ms (US/EU) and 200ms elsewhere.

    Same applies for isolating low/high variance players. You'd join a friend and 3 minutes later you're kicked.

    It's all about having more server locations. They already provided RSP renters a ping kicker set at 100ms. Official servers can't run it though.

    Thank you for this. It is beginning to make a little more sense now. No wonder it's more of a headache playing early in the morning with all of those varying high pings. I've seen experienced horrible gameplay on servers where there are a few players with pings varying from 125ms-500ms. And horrible gameplay when players have varying ping going from 25ms -200ms.
    @RevOverDrive, you explain that the low/high varience happens possibly from having cell phones going, Netflix at the same time. So last weekend the youngest was watching Netflix, my lady was on the pc surfing the web, and all three of our cell phones were connected to wi fi , yet my ping to the servers was a steady 35ms. I have a decent router set to prioritize gaming and wondered if that's why my ping wasn't affected. And those players that I see with a high varience of high /low ping, most probably don't have things set up properly ? Or is it done on purpose ?
  • LeonReed123
    82 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Really good info on here now and starting to make a lot more sense.

    I guess the only real losers are the people meeting all the criteria for a problem free game. The people who dont hit the mark I take it a lot has to do with investment from the company in servers and maybe themselves spending some time to improve their own setup.

    Still leaves me with a bitter feeling with regards the product overall as if the games playing below expected industry/consumer standards and they refuse to acknowledge or even engage with their own customers then ffs do the right thing and refund. The PR department defo needs a boost because you have lost so many premium players after the price drop when we are still waiting for what we paid full price for its a little comical.
  • lizzard
    985 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Really good info on here now and starting to make a lot more sense.

    I guess the only real losers are the people meeting all the criteria for a problem free game. The people who dont hit the mark I take it a lot has to do with investment from the company in servers and maybe themselves spending some time to improve their own setup.

    Still leaves me with a bitter feeling with regards the product overall as if the games playing below expected industry/consumer standards and they refuse to acknowledge or even engage with their own customers then ffs do the right thing and refund. The PR department defo needs a boost because you have lost so many premium players after the price drop when we are still waiting for what we paid full price for its a little comical.

    After reading up on Rev0verDrive's info in the beginning of this thread. And some really good info he linked to.

    The hopes of good online FPS games on console is crushed..
    I see a clear correlation within the friends on PlayStation. The one's that have been playing fps games online for +10 years. Are the one's that notice wtf moments first.
    Its also those guys and girls that stops to enjoy the game, and quits playing when these things happen.

    The spring patch brought back half the friendslist to bf1. And almost everyone was amazed by how the gameplay experience had changed.
    One week after the hotfix was implemented, everyone had left the game.

    And now there's no one that will even test the game.. Most seems to have traded it in for cod. I never thought the battlefield fans would go to cod, but they seem happy and say "atleast it's working!"

    As a sid note.
    Ubisoft did a overhaul of rainbow six siege, to make it more fair for lowpingers.
    Guess what? You can still join with +300ms and wreck havoc on the lowpingers..
    It feels like those issues will never ever be Okey on console!
  • VBALL_MVP
    6177 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Really good info on here now and starting to make a lot more sense.

    I guess the only real losers are the people meeting all the criteria for a problem free game. The people who dont hit the mark I take it a lot has to do with investment from the company in servers and maybe themselves spending some time to improve their own setup.

    Still leaves me with a bitter feeling with regards the product overall as if the games playing below expected industry/consumer standards and they refuse to acknowledge or even engage with their own customers then ffs do the right thing and refund. The PR department defo needs a boost because you have lost so many premium players after the price drop when we are still waiting for what we paid full price for its a little comical.

    Why are they the real losers? The game has been constantly changed (more servers, no locations, high frequency cones, Server side hit detection, less lag comp) to benefit people with good connections.

    People with high ping as well as with latency symbols all complain they are having a hard time...we all seen the vids of people complaining yet they fail to notice the icons. Playing it first hand it's easy to see that the ones getting punished are the ones with the bad connections.
  • lizzard
    985 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    Really good info on here now and starting to make a lot more sense.

    I guess the only real losers are the people meeting all the criteria for a problem free game. The people who dont hit the mark I take it a lot has to do with investment from the company in servers and maybe themselves spending some time to improve their own setup.

    Still leaves me with a bitter feeling with regards the product overall as if the games playing below expected industry/consumer standards and they refuse to acknowledge or even engage with their own customers then ffs do the right thing and refund. The PR department defo needs a boost because you have lost so many premium players after the price drop when we are still waiting for what we paid full price for its a little comical.

    Why are they the real losers? The game has been constantly changed (more servers, no locations, high frequency cones, Server side hit detection, less lag comp) to benefit people with good connections.

    People with high ping as well as with latency symbols all complain they are having a hard time...we all seen the vids of people complaining yet they fail to notice the icons. Playing it first hand it's easy to see that the ones getting punished are the ones with the bad connections.

    Don't you think your standard awnser is suitable for those too?
    "They don't understand the gamemechaniks in this game....."

    If they cant even understand the flashing reed icons.. How can they understand the complexity of bf1?
  • Rev0verDrive
    6722 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    @RevOverDrive, you explain that the low/high varience happens possibly from having cell phones going, Netflix at the same time. So last weekend the youngest was watching Netflix, my lady was on the pc surfing the web, and all three of our cell phones were connected to wi fi , yet my ping to the servers was a steady 35ms. I have a decent router set to prioritize gaming and wondered if that's why my ping wasn't affected. And those players that I see with a high varience of high /low ping, most probably don't have things set up properly ? Or is it done on purpose ?

    Your bandwidth allowance is probably a lot higher than most. And yes certain routers will prioritize traffic to minimize "bufferbloat".

    Variance happens for many reasons. The Ping, Latency, Jitter thread walks through it.
    https://forums.battlefield.com/en-us/discussion/105245/ping-latency-jitter/p1

    True, some people use software and or services to manage transmission timings of packets. For example they use the software to slow down transmission of movement/action updates which emulates high ping. But they keep inbound and hit claim transmission normal. Typically with this type of software you don't see latency variance though.
  • VBALL_MVP
    6177 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    lizzard wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    Really good info on here now and starting to make a lot more sense.

    I guess the only real losers are the people meeting all the criteria for a problem free game. The people who dont hit the mark I take it a lot has to do with investment from the company in servers and maybe themselves spending some time to improve their own setup.

    Still leaves me with a bitter feeling with regards the product overall as if the games playing below expected industry/consumer standards and they refuse to acknowledge or even engage with their own customers then ffs do the right thing and refund. The PR department defo needs a boost because you have lost so many premium players after the price drop when we are still waiting for what we paid full price for its a little comical.

    Why are they the real losers? The game has been constantly changed (more servers, no locations, high frequency cones, Server side hit detection, less lag comp) to benefit people with good connections.

    People with high ping as well as with latency symbols all complain they are having a hard time...we all seen the vids of people complaining yet they fail to notice the icons. Playing it first hand it's easy to see that the ones getting punished are the ones with the bad connections.

    Don't you think your standard awnser is suitable for those too?
    "They don't understand the gamemechaniks in this game....."

    If they cant even understand the flashing reed icons.. How can they understand the complexity of bf1?

    Not paying attention to the tips is their own fault. In my opinion DICE has made many possible ways to understand the game (single player, tip boxes, icons, social media sources, YouTube, squads, comms).

    You can lead a horse to water you can't make them drink.
  • Rev0verDrive
    6722 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    edited November 2017
    lizzard wrote:
    After reading up on Rev0verDrive's info in the beginning of this thread. And some really good info he linked to.

    The hopes of good online FPS games on console is crushed..
    I see a clear correlation within the friends on PlayStation. The one's that have been playing fps games online for +10 years. Are the one's that notice wtf moments first.
    Its also those guys and girls that stops to enjoy the game, and quits playing when these things happen.

    The spring patch brought back half the friendslist to bf1. And almost everyone was amazed by how the gameplay experience had changed.
    One week after the hotfix was implemented, everyone had left the game.

    And now there's no one that will even test the game.. Most seems to have traded it in for cod. I never thought the battlefield fans would go to cod, but they seem happy and say "atleast it's working!"

    As a sid note.
    Ubisoft did a overhaul of rainbow six siege, to make it more fair for lowpingers.
    Guess what? You can still join with +300ms and wreck havoc on the lowpingers..
    It feels like those issues will never ever be Okey on console!

    R6S Devs also posted a blog article highlighting high ping advantages, the introduction of "the icons" and general netcode information.
    https://rainbow6.ubisoft.com/siege/en-us/news/152-303559-16/dev-blog-ping-abuse-peekers-advantage-and-next-steps

    Looks quite a bit like what's been posted in here. Another studio confirming what's been said.

    icons_303573.png

    vs BF1's

    syvzV.png

  • mmarkweII
    2919 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    If the DICE devs have been accused of "lying" by some people here, and now RB6 devs have said the same things...are they lying now too? /s

    On top of it all, regarding netcode, there are 3 parties involved (on console) that in some form or another, have to deal with "red tape". What everyone wants is not as simple as it looks on paper, IMO. If you want flawless gameplay, because it is just a game, a LAN is the only way to go, period.

    As @VBALL_MVP said, you can lead a horse to water, you can't make them drink.

    Knowledge is power and knowing is half the battle. :)
  • Rev0verDrive
    6722 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    mmarkweII wrote: »
    If the DICE devs have been accused of "lying" by some people here, and now RB6 devs have said the same things...are they lying now too? /s

    On top of it all, regarding netcode, there are 3 parties involved (on console) that in some form or another, have to deal with "red tape". What everyone wants is not as simple as it looks on paper, IMO. If you want flawless gameplay, because it is just a game, a LAN is the only way to go, period.

    As @VBALL_MVP said, you can lead a horse to water, you can't make them drink.

    Knowledge is power and knowing is half the battle. :)

    There are a few things that could be done in order to offer those "close to perfect" game settings, but they would restrict a large portion of the playerbase.
  • HillbillyJohn
    492 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Take away the kill cam and let ignorance be bliss.
  • VBALL_MVP
    6177 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Take away the kill cam and let ignorance be bliss.

    It's a good idea to take the kill cam away since it is not an accurate representation of what happened. Nor is spectator mode.
  • lizzard
    985 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    lizzard wrote:
    After reading up on Rev0verDrive's info in the beginning of this thread. And some really good info he linked to.

    The hopes of good online FPS games on console is crushed..
    I see a clear correlation within the friends on PlayStation. The one's that have been playing fps games online for +10 years. Are the one's that notice wtf moments first.
    Its also those guys and girls that stops to enjoy the game, and quits playing when these things happen.

    The spring patch brought back half the friendslist to bf1. And almost everyone was amazed by how the gameplay experience had changed.
    One week after the hotfix was implemented, everyone had left the game.

    And now there's no one that will even test the game.. Most seems to have traded it in for cod. I never thought the battlefield fans would go to cod, but they seem happy and say "atleast it's working!"

    As a sid note.
    Ubisoft did a overhaul of rainbow six siege, to make it more fair for lowpingers.
    Guess what? You can still join with +300ms and wreck havoc on the lowpingers..
    It feels like those issues will never ever be Okey on console!

    R6S Devs also posted a blog article highlighting high ping advantages, the introduction of "the icons" and general netcode information.
    https://rainbow6.ubisoft.com/siege/en-us/news/152-303559-16/dev-blog-ping-abuse-peekers-advantage-and-next-steps

    Looks quite a bit like what's been posted in here. Another studio confirming what's been said.

    icons_303573.png

    vs BF1's

    syvzV.png

    Yes and it sounds like you should not be able to play r6s with a high ping or a bad connection..
    Still the game is massively out of sync when having a low ping!
    Changing datacenter to a center with +200-300ms makes you almost unstoppable!

    Enemies don't hear your footsteps.
    Dont hear you breaking a window behind them.
    When rushing in around a corner, they fire 2 meters behind you.

    Game turns from a choppy lagy fps dropping wtf fest. In to a smoth godmode experience.

    Makes no sense.. But that is how it works!
  • CurvedTax769796
    145 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Zoom, right over my head
  • VBALL_MVP
    6177 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited November 2017
    Zoom, right over my head

    I wouldn't worry about it.
  • rock1obsta
    3791 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    lizzard wrote: »
    lizzard wrote:
    After reading up on Rev0verDrive's info in the beginning of this thread. And some really good info he linked to.

    The hopes of good online FPS games on console is crushed..
    I see a clear correlation within the friends on PlayStation. The one's that have been playing fps games online for +10 years. Are the one's that notice wtf moments first.
    Its also those guys and girls that stops to enjoy the game, and quits playing when these things happen.

    The spring patch brought back half the friendslist to bf1. And almost everyone was amazed by how the gameplay experience had changed.
    One week after the hotfix was implemented, everyone had left the game.

    And now there's no one that will even test the game.. Most seems to have traded it in for cod. I never thought the battlefield fans would go to cod, but they seem happy and say "atleast it's working!"

    As a sid note.
    Ubisoft did a overhaul of rainbow six siege, to make it more fair for lowpingers.
    Guess what? You can still join with +300ms and wreck havoc on the lowpingers..
    It feels like those issues will never ever be Okey on console!

    R6S Devs also posted a blog article highlighting high ping advantages, the introduction of "the icons" and general netcode information.
    https://rainbow6.ubisoft.com/siege/en-us/news/152-303559-16/dev-blog-ping-abuse-peekers-advantage-and-next-steps

    Looks quite a bit like what's been posted in here. Another studio confirming what's been said.

    icons_303573.png

    vs BF1's

    syvzV.png

    Yes and it sounds like you should not be able to play r6s with a high ping or a bad connection..
    Still the game is massively out of sync when having a low ping!
    Changing datacenter to a center with +200-300ms makes you almost unstoppable!

    Enemies don't hear your footsteps.
    Dont hear you breaking a window behind them.
    When rushing in around a corner, they fire 2 meters behind you.

    Game turns from a choppy lagy fps dropping wtf fest. In to a smoth godmode experience.

    Makes no sense.. But that is how it works!

    This is why a person's experience should be a direct result of their own internet circumstances.
    It's completely unfair to allow someone's connection to impact anyone else's experience in any capacity.
  • HillbillyJohn
    492 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Dice might want to concentrate on making the game run and play properly before sticking in all those fancy bullet physics that aren't really credible to begin with. As an example a pistol is a last ditch effort at survival not a primary weapon that takes out players at long range. Same with auto rifles that fire pistol rounds, they are not even in the same league as bolt action rifles. Let's get real.
Sign In or Register to comment.