Dice -- bring In a Ping Player Cap To Stop Player Bleed

Comments

  • NLBartmaN
    4085 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Has something been done?

    Just played one match and all 3 digit pings were struggling at the bottom of the board and all 2 digit pings were doing well. Hit reg felt on point for the first time for me in many months.

    Too early to say but if this continues I could learn to love bfv again.
    Nope, for me it was back to trash again.

    After the previous patch high and unstable pingers had less impact on the game, now it is terrible again, one frame deaths and full clips not registering on high pingers all over again.

    The only solution to this is servers in Regions that don't have them and a ping (variation) limit
  • Delta245
    110 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    how Long till high ping players come on here to complain if they (dice) did finally do something to negatively effect high latency
  • von_Campenstein
    6621 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Delta245 said:
    how Long till high ping players come on here to complain if they (dice) did finally do something to negatively effect high latency
    Did they though?
  • NLBartmaN
    4085 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Delta245 said:
    how Long till high ping players come on here to complain if they (dice) did finally do something to negatively effect high latency
    Did they though?
    They didn't ...

    Think back on the glorious days in BF1 when they actually did do something about it ... you will with out a doubt know if they did something about it, you can't miss that.
  • Venomenal1
    289 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited July 2019
    If the latency number remains in the yellow it is fine. That means it can go up to 250. Players can kill you no problem and you can get the kills too. If it goes into the orange 251 and above then It becomes dodgy.
  • filthmcnasty
    669 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I'd be willing to bet it's the anemic content leak, provided by the GAAS business model, that is to blame. We are almost a year in and the lack of content is appalling. Other BF games had ping issues too, but this is the first to use GAAS, not paid DLC
  • 5bulletsSLR
    75 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    yeah, 80% of my death comes from high pingers were 1 frame death (super bullet)
  • UrinDenialP
    144 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    what are your packet resend levels showing on wireshark?
    also getting a lot fo range errors with packets DROP_BLOCKED....both directions.

    the packet resends are a worry.

    gsvp packets btw.
  • hkspm123
    407 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    High ping doesn't get any advantage , over 150 u will have to lead your shot so far away even at cqc range 
  • NLBartmaN
    4085 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    hkspm123 said:
    High ping doesn't get any advantage , over 150 u will have to lead your shot so far away even at cqc range 
    It is not about advantage, it is about killing the servers: the srv tick goes through the roof and makes it a bad experience for everyone.
  • Rev0verDrive
    6760 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    NLBartmaN said:
    hkspm123 said:
    High ping doesn't get any advantage , over 150 u will have to lead your shot so far away even at cqc range 
    It is not about advantage, it is about killing the servers: the srv tick goes through the roof and makes it a bad experience for everyone.

    The way you represent the issue implies the servers tickrate goes up. You need to clarify what Srv Tick is versus assuming the reader knows. By not doing so your confusing the reader and also implying something all together different.
  • NLBartmaN
    4085 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    NLBartmaN said:
    hkspm123 said:
    High ping doesn't get any advantage , over 150 u will have to lead your shot so far away even at cqc range 
    It is not about advantage, it is about killing the servers: the srv tick goes through the roof and makes it a bad experience for everyone.

    The way you represent the issue implies the servers tickrate goes up. You need to clarify what Srv Tick is versus assuming the reader knows. By not doing so your confusing the reader and also implying something all together different.
    You are the expert ... I kind of understand how it works, but it is hard for me to explain these things in "normal" words and using all the technical terms in the right way ...

    The thing I do know: right now all the BF V servers have a srv tick above 20ms and that is a bad thing ...
  • Rev0verDrive
    6760 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    edited November 2019
    NLBartmaN said:
    NLBartmaN said:
    hkspm123 said:
    High ping doesn't get any advantage , over 150 u will have to lead your shot so far away even at cqc range 
    It is not about advantage, it is about killing the servers: the srv tick goes through the roof and makes it a bad experience for everyone.

    The way you represent the issue implies the servers tickrate goes up. You need to clarify what Srv Tick is versus assuming the reader knows. By not doing so your confusing the reader and also implying something all together different.
    You are the expert ... I kind of understand how it works, but it is hard for me to explain these things in "normal" words and using all the technical terms in the right way ...

    The thing I do know: right now all the BF V servers have a srv tick above 20ms and that is a bad thing ...

    Srv Tick (network graph) is the time it takes the server to process a tick update. When this value (ms) exceeds a certain threshold, server performance degrades.

    PC game modes run at 60Hz tickrate. 60Hz tick has a tick interval of 16.67ms. Thus the server only has 16.67ms to process updates for the current tick.
    Console game modes run at 30Hz tickrate (most of them, afaik). 30Hz tick has a tick interval of 33.33ms. Thus the server only has 33.33ms to process updates for the current tick.

    The lower the Srv Tick(ms) value is the faster and more performant the server is. A high srv tick value is indicative of high server load. The longer it takes to process a tick, the heavier the load is on the server.
  • NLBartmaN
    4085 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member

    Srv Tick (network graph) is the time it takes the server to process a tick update. When this value (ms) exceeds a certain threshold, server performance degrades.

    PC game modes run at 60Hz tickrate. 60Hz tick has a tick interval of 16.67ms. Thus the server only has 16.67ms to process updates for the current tick.
    Console game modes run at 30Hz tickrate (most of them, afaik). 30Hz tick has a tick interval of 33.33ms. Thus the server only has 33.33ms to process updates for the current tick.

    The lower the Srv Tick(ms) value is the faster and more performant the server is. A high srv tick value is indicative of high server load. The longer it takes to process a tick, the heavier the load is on the server.
    Thank you for the explanation.

    That Threshold was around 12ms on 60Hz and 15ms on 30Hz servers as I recall?

    So all (console 30Hz) servers having a srv tick above 20ms, lots even 24ms and I even have seen 27ms is just very bad?

    And the more ping variation/high/unstable pingers there are on a server, the higher the srv tick goes?
  • M_Rat13
    1466 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    NLBartmaN said:
    NLBartmaN said:
    hkspm123 said:
    High ping doesn't get any advantage , over 150 u will have to lead your shot so far away even at cqc range 
    It is not about advantage, it is about killing the servers: the srv tick goes through the roof and makes it a bad experience for everyone.

    The way you represent the issue implies the servers tickrate goes up. You need to clarify what Srv Tick is versus assuming the reader knows. By not doing so your confusing the reader and also implying something all together different.
    You are the expert ... I kind of understand how it works, but it is hard for me to explain these things in "normal" words and using all the technical terms in the right way ...

    The thing I do know: right now all the BF V servers have a srv tick above 20ms and that is a bad thing ...

    Srv Tick (network graph) is the time it takes the server to process a tick update. When this value (ms) exceeds a certain threshold, server performance degrades.

    PC game modes run at 60Hz tickrate. 60Hz tick has a tick interval of 16.67ms. Thus the server only has 16.67ms to process updates for the current tick.
    Console game modes run at 30Hz tickrate (most of them, afaik). 30Hz tick has a tick interval of 33.33ms. Thus the server only has 33.33ms to process updates for the current tick.

    The lower the Srv Tick(ms) value is the faster and more performant the server is. A high srv tick value is indicative of high server load. The longer it takes to process a tick, the heavier the load is on the server.

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like to me, Console servers are better, because they have more time to process data.
  • NLBartmaN
    4085 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    M_Rat13 said:

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like to me, Console servers are better, because they have more time to process data.
    As far as I understand: the HIGHER the tickrate, the better the experience (more accurate hitreg, location of enemies, etc, everything is updated more often) ...

    So PC servers are better (more resources and faster) when they perform UNDER the threshold.

    The faster a server processes all data, the better (and more accurate) experience you have.

    The problem right now is: the servers (on console) are unable to stay under the threshold, which make the game feel terrible and annoying.
  • M_Rat13
    1466 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    NLBartmaN said:
    M_Rat13 said:

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like to me, Console servers are better, because they have more time to process data.
    As far as I understand: the HIGHER the tickrate, the better the experience (more accurate hitreg, location of enemies, etc, everything is updated more often) ...

    So PC servers are better (more resources and faster) when they perform UNDER the threshold.

    The faster a server processes all data, the better (and more accurate) experience you have.

    The problem right now is: the servers (on console) are unable to stay under the threshold, which make the game feel terrible and annoying.

    Sorry, what I meant was, if server tickrate is low, Consoles are more likely to perform better, because what might be outside the PC server threshold, might still be in the Console server threshold. Again, might be wrong on that one.
  • NLBartmaN
    4085 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    M_Rat13 said:

    Sorry, what I meant was, if server tickrate is low, Consoles are more likely to perform better, because what might be outside the PC server threshold, might still be in the Console server threshold. Again, might be wrong on that one.
    The problem is:
    the difference is not that big (12ms vs 15ms), the fact that the tick rate is double the amount does not mean the threshold is double the amount, RevOverDrive explained in a different topic why.

    Dice/EA also does not use the same server configuration (assigned resources), so virtual PC servers get more resources to (try to) stay under the lower threshold than console servers.

    If the console servers would have the same resources as pc servers and also had a srv tick of under 10ms (like most PC servers had that I played on) the game would run perfect on console.

    In reality almost all console servers have a srv tick of above 20ms and lots even 24ms ...

    It is all about the money, running (for example) 4 more virtual servers on a hardware server saves lots of money.
  • Rev0verDrive
    6760 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    M_Rat13 said:
    NLBartmaN said:
    NLBartmaN said:
    hkspm123 said:
    High ping doesn't get any advantage , over 150 u will have to lead your shot so far away even at cqc range 
    It is not about advantage, it is about killing the servers: the srv tick goes through the roof and makes it a bad experience for everyone.

    The way you represent the issue implies the servers tickrate goes up. You need to clarify what Srv Tick is versus assuming the reader knows. By not doing so your confusing the reader and also implying something all together different.
    You are the expert ... I kind of understand how it works, but it is hard for me to explain these things in "normal" words and using all the technical terms in the right way ...

    The thing I do know: right now all the BF V servers have a srv tick above 20ms and that is a bad thing ...

    Srv Tick (network graph) is the time it takes the server to process a tick update. When this value (ms) exceeds a certain threshold, server performance degrades.

    PC game modes run at 60Hz tickrate. 60Hz tick has a tick interval of 16.67ms. Thus the server only has 16.67ms to process updates for the current tick.
    Console game modes run at 30Hz tickrate (most of them, afaik). 30Hz tick has a tick interval of 33.33ms. Thus the server only has 33.33ms to process updates for the current tick.

    The lower the Srv Tick(ms) value is the faster and more performant the server is. A high srv tick value is indicative of high server load. The longer it takes to process a tick, the heavier the load is on the server.

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like to me, Console servers are better, because they have more time to process data.

    Higher the tickrate == greater precision. player positions, movement etc.

    How much movement can I do in 16.67ms vs 33.33ms .... more movement equals longer calculations and increases the margin of error.

    NLBartmaN said:
    M_Rat13 said:

    Sorry, what I meant was, if server tickrate is low, Consoles are more likely to perform better, because what might be outside the PC server threshold, might still be in the Console server threshold. Again, might be wrong on that one.
    The problem is:
    the difference is not that big (12ms vs 15ms), the fact that the tick rate is double the amount does not mean the threshold is double the amount, RevOverDrive explained in a different topic why.

    Dice/EA also does not use the same server configuration (assigned resources), so virtual PC servers get more resources to (try to) stay under the lower threshold than console servers.

    If the console servers would have the same resources as pc servers and also had a srv tick of under 10ms (like most PC servers had that I played on) the game would run perfect on console.

    In reality almost all console servers have a srv tick of above 20ms and lots even 24ms ...

    It is all about the money, running (for example) 4 more virtual servers on a hardware server saves lots of money.
    As far as I'm aware both PC and Console servers have the same resources. The console itself is the bottleneck and cannot process 60 updates a second. For BF1 console only small game modes ran at 60Hz. Like TDM etc. Not sure if that's the same on console for BFV.

    On PC if a player dips below 49FPS the server will throttle updates to 30Hz. Meaning instead of sending 60 per second it'll drop to 30 per second. The same will happen if the client is limited on bandwidth.

    There's no point sending 60 if the client cannot process them/keep up. This is just one way the server recoups resources where it can.
  • NLBartmaN
    4085 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    As far as I'm aware both PC and Console servers have the same resources. The console itself is the bottleneck and cannot process 60 updates a second. For BF1 console only small game modes ran at 60Hz. Like TDM etc. Not sure if that's the same on console for BFV.
    That would mean that increasing the resources of the server for console would make no difference (for the srv tick value) and I don't think that is the case.

    The impact of some higher/variable ping players, adding an extra virtual server on a hardware server all have a direct impact on the srv tick, more resources for all the virtual servers to process the extra data should counter that.

    If the consoles would be the bottleneck there would not be such a huge difference in srv tick value between all the full (64 player) servers (I have seen 11 to 27ms).
Sign In or Register to comment.