Hit Detection

Comments

  • jdbelcher1998
    587 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Can anyone else do me a favor and ping or traceroute the US East PS4 server? 159.153.114.192

    I'm diagnosing issues with my ISP within my local network (they can't figure out the issue with my connection), but I'm getting straight timeouts outside my network when I traceroute this IP (before I ever get to 159.153, but after it's outside my local network). Is that server down? Thanks.
  • diagoro
    1505 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    mischkag wrote: »
    FYI: I changed the grenade bouncing to not happen off teammates within 10m. The reasoning is that when you throw a grenade near team mates and they walk right into the direction, they may already be inside your throwing direction on the server (as they are ahead of your client there) and the grenade bounces off. Will be on CTE next week and the next patch.
    I also had to adjust the kill trade evaluation to be more fair and happening less often. So if you get your shot off on the server while still being alive, your bullet will count. This should support longer range exchanges without resulting in too many killtrades like we saw on CTE yesterday (exaggerated by the higher latency average on CTE). I hope that will be a good enough compromise. Based on feedback i could change it even further. CTE is the right platform for this as otherwise you guys always need to wait yet another month at least. But then again we dont have the console CTE up and running yet, very unfortunate. I pointed out the importance of this.

    Yes Mr. BattleNonSense was in touch with me. I am doing the netcode changes since launch of BF4. The values should be slightly better next week. But i changed the damage indication to be more in sync with the shooter position. So i traded a better number there for more precision on your screen (remember the issues where you get damage but don't see the shooter yet..). I also give him insight information to allow more transparency. I am also always open for suggestions and change things.It may not be the magic fix you always hope for, but you guys are the ones who care a lot (and complain a lot too :)) so we listen.
    Feedback like from @jeepers871755 makes you sometimes question it though.

    @xXGugusseXx: There is only one pingsite in europe (Ireland) and thats what they use to do the matchmaking with. You have to understand that i am an engineer working on netcode. I cannot influence all that much where and how many servers we will provide. So do you want me to rather do nothing to mitigate the issues?
    Of course ping caps would be the ideal solution, but i am trying to fix and improve the issues as much as i can. There is progress. There are more server regions than we have ever had for any Battlefield game.

    @KingTolapsium: I passed your suggestion on to the Audio team

    There is no hit rejection at all. You cannot let a player with a ping of X join a server and then reject all his hits. Does not make sense to me.
    But, with the next patch, hitting somebody moving with a ping of 250ms will be a major undertaking....

    As far as the server tick goes. Battlenonsense is correct that the faster the server runs, the better it is. The values you are seeing are 1s averages. If there is a spike on the server, than it tries to make up for it. But during that spike, no data was sent out which makes everyone run into extrapolation. Therefore higher than usual servertick values usually indicate that there has been a spike which can lead to hit detection and rubberbanding issues depending on the severity. These spikes happen usually when some object results in some bad physics interaction.

    @mischkag , Maybe you guys can also remove the self damage when using the AA. Since day one, trolls who want the weapon will stand in front of gun, so that person using gun takes damage and dies, making weapon available.
  • Immortal_0neShot
    384 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    edited March 2017
    King tolapsium. You mentioning me in posts is off topic too.

    If i say something its a rant. Its a forum. If you dont like my posts just ignore. I did it to some here too or stop crying. You really feel entitled do you. Next time when you have a brain fart please direct it at someone else. Or is this forum all you have?

    Jusy saying :smile:
  • mischkag
    214 postsMember, Developer DICE
    Hey guys, as always I appreciate your feedback. But i would really like to keep topics associated with threads. If you want changes to suppression, please create a thread. We have designers responsible for this. Same with Aim Assist. We have a dedicated developer being in charge of this. Please create a thread about this.

    Btw as far as suppression goes. For most weapons in the game we already have it set up so that you can completely negate the accuracy penalty by firing slower or firing shorter bursts which decreases your damage output anyway, which is the goal of suppression.

    We have identified the invisible soldier issue and are very hopeful to have finally fixed it.
  • jdbelcher1998
    587 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    jjju wrote: »
    I'm really starting to feel like the auto-rotation is destroying any notion of a "fair gunfight". Waiting for console testing, kinda sucks, I wish DICE would just give it a rough balance pass already.

    What do dynamics like spread, recoil, and suppression really contribute if all I need to do is hop around playing "hit the triggers in the right order". Combat is almost completely binary unless you're hiding behind cover or long distance.

    It feels like I'm playing "juniors first shooter" most of the time. God I hope we can get rid of the feeling that everyone has training wheels.

    @mischkag

    You might not want to throw your hat into the ring with this one, and I more than understand, but what is your opinion on the aim assist and it's effects on the perception of netcode inaccuracies?

    For over two years tiggr continued to tell me he could not see how the exceptional accuracy and reduction of aiming error provided by these assists might make the gunfights and netcode feel unfair.

    I think that's nonsense, and still feel the aim assist is downplaying any skill requirement.

    The aim assist was tuned by the core gameplay design team. There is the opposite story too ... we still get requests about increasing the aim assist. Many think currently it is too weak.
    What you'll be getting soon is the option to turn it off by the server admin. Then you can have custom ranked games for those who want to play without aim assist.

    Thanks for commenting on this. May I ask where the info is coming from that there are "many" who think aim assist is too weak? I've just seen no one on any platform mention such a thing either here or on twitter or on reddit.

    As for custom servers, it's great they'll be ranked, but the problem with these in the past is that they've been ghostlands—vastly underpopulated. Maybe that will change this game so I'll gladly wait and see, but I have to say past experience has told me this will not be enough. I get that aim assist is there to appeal to a wider player base; I just wish it was at least taken back to the level it was in BF4 (which was already strong for auto-rotation snap-to).
  • jjju
    115 postsMember, Developer DICE, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V
    As for custom servers, it's great they'll be ranked, but the problem with these in the past is that they've been ghostlands—vastly underpopulated
    If as you say so many people want the aim assist removed, then ranked servers with it turned off should be super popular, no?

  • jdbelcher1998
    587 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    jjju wrote: »
    As for custom servers, it's great they'll be ranked, but the problem with these in the past is that they've been ghostlands—vastly underpopulated
    If as you say so many people want the aim assist removed, then ranked servers with it turned off should be super popular, no?

    Well I actually didn't say that—I think there are a fair mix of people who would like to see it removed, others who want it toned down a bit (or a lot), and still others who want exactly what you guys are providing. I just haven't seen anyone say aim assist is too weak. I meant that genuinely not sardonically. But as I said I'm happy to wait and see how the custom servers go and I do hope they'll be popular because I think gameplay will only be improved with everyone on the same playing field. Thanks again for your engagement. Peace.
  • MAGNUM_MU5TACHE
    1158 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited March 2017
    How come a DICE dev comes on here and responds to a hit detection thread, but we can't get any response on the rent-a-server program? Not trying to derail the thread just wondering if you guys know anything... >:) Love that you guys are working on the hit reg! he hit reg is nearly perfect for me by the way. I have been shot by a few invisible guys around corners though.
  • KingTolapsium
    5491 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited March 2017
    jjju wrote: »
    As for custom servers, it's great they'll be ranked, but the problem with these in the past is that they've been ghostlands—vastly underpopulated
    If as you say so many people want the aim assist removed, then ranked servers with it turned off should be super popular, no?
    @jjju

    Facetious question? Looks like it.

    Finding custom rounds is anything but convenient. The UI is atrocious.

    How is an inexperienced player supposed to figure out any of the features buried in menus?

    Address accessibility before trying to gage success by this metric. That should be obvious to anyone playing on console.

    :)
    Post edited by KingTolapsium on
  • MAGNUM_MU5TACHE
    1158 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited March 2017
    jjju wrote: »
    As for custom servers, it's great they'll be ranked, but the problem with these in the past is that they've been ghostlands—vastly underpopulated
    If as you say so many people want the aim assist removed, then ranked servers with it turned off should be super popular, no?

    Once a server is altered and becomes 'custom' no on BF1 joins it because the quick match won't send players there. and you need 20 players to start a round on conquest mode.
  • mmarkweII
    2919 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    jjju wrote: »
    As for custom servers, it's great they'll be ranked, but the problem with these in the past is that they've been ghostlands—vastly underpopulated
    If as you say so many people want the aim assist removed, then ranked servers with it turned off should be super popular, no?

    Facetious question? Looks like it.

    Finding custom rounds is anything but convenient. The UI is atrocious.

    How is an inexperienced player supposed to figure out any of the features buried in menus?

    Address accessibility before trying to gage success by this metric. That should be obvious to anyone playing on console.

    :)

    My POV on this is, the general player base isn't concerned so much about this and just want to turn on and play. Part of that is being able to have fun without putting in a ton of hours to "gitgud" or even understand (in depth) the current topic of "netcode". On the flip side, those players who do "care" about this, are usually informed a little more than the general player base so they would know how to find those servers they are looking for. Which brings me back to my original point....if that player base (anti aim assist etc) was so popular, those servers would be self sustaining no matter where they are found in the server browser.

    On another note...I do believe I had an instance of being held while taking damage last night. But in that instance, I did die. I'll be continuing to keep an eye out for this while not being killed.
  • jdbelcher1998
    587 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    mmarkweII wrote: »
    jjju wrote: »
    As for custom servers, it's great they'll be ranked, but the problem with these in the past is that they've been ghostlands—vastly underpopulated
    If as you say so many people want the aim assist removed, then ranked servers with it turned off should be super popular, no?

    Facetious question? Looks like it.

    Finding custom rounds is anything but convenient. The UI is atrocious.

    How is an inexperienced player supposed to figure out any of the features buried in menus?

    Address accessibility before trying to gage success by this metric. That should be obvious to anyone playing on console.

    :)

    My POV on this is, the general player base isn't concerned so much about this and just want to turn on and play. Part of that is being able to have fun without putting in a ton of hours to "gitgud" or even understand (in depth) the current topic of "netcode". On the flip side, those players who do "care" about this, are usually informed a little more than the general player base so they would know how to find those servers they are looking for. Which brings me back to my original point....if that player base (anti aim assist etc) was so popular, those servers would be self sustaining no matter where they are found in the server browser.

    On another note...I do believe I had an instance of being held while taking damage last night. But in that instance, I did die. I'll be continuing to keep an eye out for this while not being killed.

    That makes sense to me and I think that's reasonable.

    As for being held while taking damage, I believe this happens to me only when I die. I've been monitoring it too and I always get the sense that @mischkag pointed out several pages earlier that the server has already determined you're dead on the server. But in previous titles I would have had time to react and at least return some damage even if I died but when this happens it feels like fate.
  • KingTolapsium
    5491 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited March 2017
    jjju wrote: »
    I'm really starting to feel like the auto-rotation is destroying any notion of a "fair gunfight". Waiting for console testing, kinda sucks, I wish DICE would just give it a rough balance pass already.

    What do dynamics like spread, recoil, and suppression really contribute if all I need to do is hop around playing "hit the triggers in the right order". Combat is almost completely binary unless you're hiding behind cover or long distance.

    It feels like I'm playing "juniors first shooter" most of the time. God I hope we can get rid of the feeling that everyone has training wheels.

    @mischkag

    You might not want to throw your hat into the ring with this one, and I more than understand, but what is your opinion on the aim assist and it's effects on the perception of netcode inaccuracies?

    For over two years tiggr continued to tell me he could not see how the exceptional accuracy and reduction of aiming error provided by these assists might make the gunfights and netcode feel unfair.

    I think that's nonsense, and still feel the aim assist is downplaying any skill requirement.

    The aim assist was tuned by the core gameplay design team. There is the opposite story too ... we still get requests about increasing the aim assist. Many think currently it is too weak.
    What you'll be getting soon is the option to turn it off by the server admin. Then you can have custom ranked games for those who want to play without aim assist.

    Tuned by the core design team... to work uniformly across all weapons when applied.

    Sorry, that isn't what I think of when I think of a "tuned" system.

    I was reporting the snap and slowdown working through solid cover in the alpha, starting to seem like reporting any issue with the aim assist is fruitless. It only took TWO TITLES for the trigger spamming to be addressed (and that was horribly broken). Why would things change now?

    All I see is fluffy pr about changes coming from tiggr and you doing damage control (by this i mean implementing server side disables) seemingly unable to imagine that your team might have over done the rotaional assist in some aspects.

    Have you maybe considered that players want a stronger aim assist because the assist is helping others to such an extreme degree??

    To feel like you can keep up with players using the rotational aim assist (which is non-intuitive and unexplained ingame) I would imagine most inexperienced players would really want some more help (damage rationalization being weird certainly doesn't help this perception).

    I only brought it up because the rotational aim assist reduces the btk for players and time to target, thusly increasing the immediacy of damage delivery. This impacts damage perception and gunfights, regardless of the silence on this subject. Sorry your game feels cheap in combat, I just want it to feel good, it's the same reason I report netcode bugs.

    "What you'll be getting soon is the option to turn it off by the server admin."

    Lovely, in theory, the game flow for custom rounds, and the presentation of their existence in general is bad.

    Has the team even considered no aim assist in hardcore? Or a no-assist custom variant? Why develop a feature just to let it die?

    Tiggr has made is seem as though DICE will be adjusting the aim assist values with the cte once console becomes available, am I under the wrong impression?

    Tiggr even said it was too strong. I'm certainly not alone in having this sentiment, by ignoring this conversation, you're ignoring the potential for significant improvement.

    That being said, this is way off topic (now) and I'll continue waiting for the console cte for a shot at addressing the values used in the assists.
  • xzhpete
    32 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    mischkag wrote: »
    I changed the damage indication to be more in sync with the shooter position. So i traded a better number there for more precision on your screen (remember the issues where you get damage but don't see the shooter yet..).
    What if the shooter is behind you and therefore you can not see them anyway; does the system still delay the communication of damage then?
  • mmarkweII
    2919 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    mmarkweII wrote: »
    jjju wrote: »
    As for custom servers, it's great they'll be ranked, but the problem with these in the past is that they've been ghostlands—vastly underpopulated
    If as you say so many people want the aim assist removed, then ranked servers with it turned off should be super popular, no?

    Facetious question? Looks like it.

    Finding custom rounds is anything but convenient. The UI is atrocious.

    How is an inexperienced player supposed to figure out any of the features buried in menus?

    Address accessibility before trying to gage success by this metric. That should be obvious to anyone playing on console.

    :)

    My POV on this is, the general player base isn't concerned so much about this and just want to turn on and play. Part of that is being able to have fun without putting in a ton of hours to "gitgud" or even understand (in depth) the current topic of "netcode". On the flip side, those players who do "care" about this, are usually informed a little more than the general player base so they would know how to find those servers they are looking for. Which brings me back to my original point....if that player base (anti aim assist etc) was so popular, those servers would be self sustaining no matter where they are found in the server browser.

    On another note...I do believe I had an instance of being held while taking damage last night. But in that instance, I did die. I'll be continuing to keep an eye out for this while not being killed.

    That makes sense to me and I think that's reasonable.

    As for being held while taking damage, I believe this happens to me only when I die. I've been monitoring it too and I always get the sense that @mischkag pointed out several pages earlier that the server has already determined you're dead on the server. But in previous titles I would have had time to react and at least return some damage even if I died but when this happens it feels like fate.

    I understand why it happens, upon being killed. I have had it happen a couple of times while not getting killed. Those are the instances I've been trying to capture so I can post.
  • oJU5T1No
    901 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Tiggr even said it was too strong. I'm certainly not alone in having this sentiment, by ignoring this conversation, you're ignoring the potential for significant improvement.

    That being said, this is way off topic (now) and I'll continue waiting for the console cte for a shot at addressing the values used in the assists.


    I agree the aim assist is a little bit too strong when compared to other shooters in this game its to easy and quick to snap
    to target, when aiming at players who are clearly lagging and having issues with there connection rubber banding around ,aiming at them is like trying to stick the north pole of a magnet to the south I end up fighting the auto rotation or I get no slowdown or I get the slow down in the wrong place.

    Its a shame the netcode is the only area we can give feedback and get improvements.

  • 2003cobravert
    61 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    This game, like everyone that seems to be released by EA now, is utter crap!! I'm so tired of playing games that reward **** people with kills. Once again I can't help but sense the ole everyone gets a medal concept. It's BS! Either learn how to play or gtfo. It's that simple. This hit detection crap has existed ever since they got away from bfbc2s server side hit detection. I'm so glad I never bought the last game they produced. And I'm even more happy I never purchased premium now as it's not nearly as enjoyable as it could be. But hey, let's keep buying there **** products because it's got "cool" graphics!!
  • KingTolapsium
    5491 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited March 2017
    @mischkag

    I've noticed some deaths from high ping have seemed silent for a while (since bf4), it's like they are ninjas in slippers or have special quiet horses, I believe this is due to position desync, this does not feel fair or consistent. Would it be possible to use the clientside extrapolation to give the footstep audio a more accurate position for low ping players, avoiding silent deaths? If a player with high ping is moving at full speed, would it make sense to originate the audio in front of the soldier by a bit (~1-2m for soldiers, idk for horses) to give players a more consistent audio experience?

    I also keep noticing the damage indicator.... and then the explosion and corresponding audio trailing behind, it would be nice if this was more synchronized.
  • Rev0verDrive
    6653 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    @mischkag
    Currently if not mistaken, damage data is sent at a rate equivalent to your current FPS. So if I'm playing with 88FPS, I'm sending at 88Hz, the server gets it and sends it out at the tickrate 60hz or 30hz...platform dependent. If I'm only able to get 40FPS, I'm send damage data at 40Hz ... That's 20 below PC tick. Are there any plans to change the minimum send rate to be on par with the tickrate?

Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!