Having trouble accessing the forums? Try logging out of the forums completely - clear cache, cookies, and temp files - then restart the browser and log in. Thanks!

Hit Detection

Comments

  • denjoga
    443 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    So now we are stating hit reg is a known bug...well I'm saying that it was a big prior to patch, it wasn't acknowledged because A no one could proove who was a high pingers or not and B they applied a change and people are still having issues with vid proof.
    No.
    The bug being referred to causes people to get 0 hit markers - this did not exist pre-patch.
    Spotty, sloppy, hit reg, yes - 0 hit reg, no.
  • VBALL_MVP
    2911 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    denjoga wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    So now we are stating hit reg is a known bug...well I'm saying that it was a big prior to patch, it wasn't acknowledged because A no one could proove who was a high pingers or not and B they applied a change and people are still having issues with vid proof.
    No.
    The bug being referred to causes people to get 0 hit markers - this did not exist pre-patch.
    Spotty, sloppy, hit reg, yes - 0 hit reg, no.

    Thanks for the clarity, well I'm referencing the sloppy hit reg like in my video.
  • KingTolapsium
    4912 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    "The issues you posted were present pre/post hotfix." -KingTolapsium

    "present pre patch and hot fix" - Not KingTolapsium

    There is a large difference here, I don't think you intended the misquote, but it completely misconstrues my point.

    "as I stated the issues are still there (and I'm talking about hit reg cause that's what the thread is about) and others with low ping have stated they are having the issue too so again my theory is that something else, in my opinion the servers, are the issue"

    You realize the changed factor (implemented code) is probably to blame for such a drastic increase? (Huge correlation can indeed lead us to causation).

    "So now we are stating hit reg is a known bug...well I'm saying that it was a big prior to patch, it wasn't acknowledged because A no one could proove who was a high pingers or not and B they applied a change and people are still having issues with vid proof."

    It's a known bug, because the devs know about it, me saying it's known, doesn't change any of that. They've publicly asked for help in finding the issue, that's how I know.

    It might've been the same bug pre-patch, might be the hit reg bug from bf4. It could be totally new. You don't know.

    "We do know from tests the Battlenonsense had done in the past, that high latency doesn't cause the Srvtick to increase abnormally, so if my theory that the servers are not stable is correct the question still is what is causing it?"

    Just because things were tested in bf4, does not mean we "know" the same applies in bf1. Besides, I cannot consistently duplicate this. Is an issue not an issue, if it's not perfectly consistent?

    I don't understand how limited external tests work as concrete proof, we as consumers simply do not have access to enough data, especially in relation to server performance.
  • VBALL_MVP
    2911 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    edited May 10
    "The issues you posted were present pre/post hotfix." -KingTolapsium

    "present pre patch and hot fix" - Not KingTolapsium

    There is a large difference here, I don't think you intended the misquote, but it completely misconstrues my point.

    "as I stated the issues are still there (and I'm talking about hit reg cause that's what the thread is about) and others with low ping have stated they are having the issue too so again my theory is that something else, in my opinion the servers, are the issue"

    You realize the changed factor (implemented code) is probably to blame for such a drastic increase? (Huge correlation can indeed lead us to causation).

    "So now we are stating hit reg is a known bug...well I'm saying that it was a big prior to patch, it wasn't acknowledged because A no one could proove who was a high pingers or not and B they applied a change and people are still having issues with vid proof."

    It's a known bug, because the devs know about it, me saying it's known, doesn't change any of that. They've publicly asked for help in finding the issue, that's how I know.

    It might've been the same bug pre-patch, might be the hit reg bug from bf4. It could be totally new. You don't know.

    "We do know from tests the Battlenonsense had done in the past, that high latency doesn't cause the Srvtick to increase abnormally, so if my theory that the servers are not stable is correct the question still is what is causing it?"

    Just because things were tested in bf4, does not mean we "know" the same applies in bf1. Besides, I cannot consistently duplicate this. Is an issue not an issue, if it's not perfectly consistent?

    I don't understand how limited external tests work as concrete proof, we as consumers simply do not have access to enough data, especially in relation to server performance.

    Again thats why I stated it as my opinion. I haven't forced anything in my post you are referencing as absolute fact. If you don't agree with my theory and opinion, then dont.

    And yes it was not my intention to misquote you.
  • KingTolapsium
    4912 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    "The issues you posted were present pre/post hotfix." -KingTolapsium

    "present pre patch and hot fix" - Not KingTolapsium

    There is a large difference here, I don't think you intended the misquote, but it completely misconstrues my point.

    "as I stated the issues are still there (and I'm talking about hit reg cause that's what the thread is about) and others with low ping have stated they are having the issue too so again my theory is that something else, in my opinion the servers, are the issue"

    You realize the changed factor (implemented code) is probably to blame for such a drastic increase? (Huge correlation can indeed lead us to causation).

    "So now we are stating hit reg is a known bug...well I'm saying that it was a big prior to patch, it wasn't acknowledged because A no one could proove who was a high pingers or not and B they applied a change and people are still having issues with vid proof."

    It's a known bug, because the devs know about it, me saying it's known, doesn't change any of that. They've publicly asked for help in finding the issue, that's how I know.

    It might've been the same bug pre-patch, might be the hit reg bug from bf4. It could be totally new. You don't know.

    "We do know from tests the Battlenonsense had done in the past, that high latency doesn't cause the Srvtick to increase abnormally, so if my theory that the servers are not stable is correct the question still is what is causing it?"

    Just because things were tested in bf4, does not mean we "know" the same applies in bf1. Besides, I cannot consistently duplicate this. Is an issue not an issue, if it's not perfectly consistent?

    I don't understand how limited external tests work as concrete proof, we as consumers simply do not have access to enough data, especially in relation to server performance.

    Again thats why I stated it as my opinion. I haven't forced anything in my post you are referencing as absolute fact. If you don't agree with my theory and opinion, then dont.

    And yes it was not my intention to misquote you.

    I get that. I'm just trying to make things crystal clear, it's very easy for things to be misconstrued online.
  • lizzard
    647 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    "The issues you posted were present pre/post hotfix." -KingTolapsium

    "present pre patch and hot fix" - Not KingTolapsium

    There is a large difference here, I don't think you intended the misquote, but it completely misconstrues my point.

    "as I stated the issues are still there (and I'm talking about hit reg cause that's what the thread is about) and others with low ping have stated they are having the issue too so again my theory is that something else, in my opinion the servers, are the issue"

    You realize the changed factor (implemented code) is probably to blame for such a drastic increase? (Huge correlation can indeed lead us to causation).

    "So now we are stating hit reg is a known bug...well I'm saying that it was a big prior to patch, it wasn't acknowledged because A no one could proove who was a high pingers or not and B they applied a change and people are still having issues with vid proof."

    It's a known bug, because the devs know about it, me saying it's known, doesn't change any of that. They've publicly asked for help in finding the issue, that's how I know.

    It might've been the same bug pre-patch, might be the hit reg bug from bf4. It could be totally new. You don't know.

    "We do know from tests the Battlenonsense had done in the past, that high latency doesn't cause the Srvtick to increase abnormally, so if my theory that the servers are not stable is correct the question still is what is causing it?"

    Just because things were tested in bf4, does not mean we "know" the same applies in bf1. Besides, I cannot consistently duplicate this. Is an issue not an issue, if it's not perfectly consistent?

    I don't understand how limited external tests work as concrete proof, we as consumers simply do not have access to enough data, especially in relation to server performance.

    And what I tryed to point out.
    Do the server performance only correlate to the SrvTick values?
    Or can there be something that simply makes the servers or the netcode to go sour, over time?

    I dont know what makes a phone or a computer to go bad whit time and usage?
    But I do know that almost every teknological thing will eventually become more unstable!

    Somethings seems to be much more stable and become much less unstable with time, then some other..

    Is the servers and the netcode, as reliable as the hardware and code that is used to fly to space?

    In my opinion there is nothing that is completely bulletproof.. And therefore no one can state that the gameplay experience doesn't degrade!
  • HillbillyJohn
    199 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Most of the tdm servers I've been playing in have at least 3 players over 150ms, (this is up since the hotfix) and hit detection seems to to be hit or miss, pardon the pun. When the patch rolled out I saw several high latency players to begin with but they thinned out fairly fast but since the hot patch they are back. Now almost every game I'm in has pre-patch stuff going on, I can't prove it's because of high pingers but it seems like more than coincidence to me.

    Just my 2 cents.
  • oJU5T1No
    763 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    edited May 10
    Surely it takes more computing power to compensate for players poor connections, surely it will take more computing power to compensate for players lost packets and trying to merge high latency players past game state into the present game state.
    The servers aren't bad I get very varying experiences that to me looks to be dependent on the other players connections on the server, unstable connections (varying pings) have the largest negative impact on the server.
    The netcode in this game is coded to give high pingers the best experience I don't think its broken its working as intended thats why low pingers experience alot of de-sync and wonkyness, the netcode seems very aggressive and unforgiving when merging the high latency players past state (what they see on there screen) to the low pingers present state(what the low pinger sees on there screen) this also obviously gives advantages to the high latency players at the expense of the low latency players game.
    The netcode needs to be less aggressive and forgiving to players with bad connections lost and delayed packets should just cancel damage and interactions rather than the netcode trying to compensate for it negatively affecting everyone elses game.
  • Rev0verDrive
    4801 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    edited May 10
    Server resources are being impacted by the server-side only hitreg arbitration. That's common sense. Is the impact enough to cause any of the issues many are seeing? That's the question I'm posing.

    Pre-patch everyone was running the client detect -> server register hitreg. The only time the server ran arbitration was when a client determined a hit. This is a resource saver for the server and a bandwidth saver for the client.

    In a single second how many hit claims on average do you think the server had to arbitrate? 10, 20?
    What's the average buffer sizes for low ping and high ping hit arbitrations?

    Post-patch (100ms)
    All shots fired for those over the threshold have to be arbitrated.
    All of those shots had to buffer more history, thus more resources.

    Using the Hellriegel as an example (because it's used a lot) has an rof of 10.8 shots per second. Just 2 hp's mag dumping would put enough shots in queue to equal what's normally done by 64 low pingers with client-side detection.

    Hotfix (150ms)
    This just increases the number of HP's per server. Almost effectively tripling or quadrupling the number of arbitrations per second.

    These are of course periodic spikes, not constant. But they do have an effect.

    Good test would be to have 8 hp's simply mag dump and monitor resources during.
  • VBALL_MVP
    2911 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    These are all good questions
  • oJU5T1No
    763 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    I experienced alot of de-sync and lag and other strange latency related things pre server side hit dection and I don't think the server side hit detection has impacted any of this, It was suspected pre-patch high latency players with unstable connections were lagging out the servers now with ping in the scoreboard theres some evidence to support this.
  • Rev0verDrive
    4801 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    oJU5T1No wrote: »
    I experienced alot of de-sync and lag and other strange latency related things pre server side hit dection and I don't think the server side hit detection has impacted any of this, It was suspected pre-patch high latency players with unstable connections were lagging out the servers now with ping in the scoreboard theres some evidence to support this.

    Well you shouldn't really "lag" because of hp's do to the netcode and Lag comp changes. Desync should've been resolved.
  • misisipiRivrRat
    225 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Most of the tdm servers I've been playing in have at least 3 players over 150ms, (this is up since the hotfix) and hit detection seems to to be hit or miss, pardon the pun. When the patch rolled out I saw several high latency players to begin with but they thinned out fairly fast but since the hot patch they are back. Now almost every game I'm in has pre-patch stuff going on, I can't prove it's because of high pingers but it seems like more than coincidence to me.

    Just my 2 cents.

    Hi John,
    Just played a few matches of Frontlines and they were terrible . This is so friggin' frustrating right now. Finally had enough when a enemy sniper ran by me and I started unloading on him. His character was being hit but no hit markers. Turns and kills me. By the way he had a low ping. @vball. Can I ask which us region you play, east or west? You say you aren't seeing many high pingers. It's the opposite for me. 5-10 every match of Frontlines. Maybe that isn't a lot? I mostly play us east. Also I saw a few guys with very low ping maybe like what you've seen in your netgraph. To guys on the enemy team had pings of 11ms as did a guy on my team.
  • mmarkweII
    2602 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    edited May 10
    @Rev0verDrive In your opinion, do you think it would be beneficial to run 3 instances (instead of 4) on a server to save resources for that server if/when needed?

    @misisipiRivrRat we usually play US East mostly between 9 til midnight eastern (sometimes later). CQL. Smaller game modes should be at 60hz now, so any issues on those servers would be noticed easier, correct?
  • misisipiRivrRat
    225 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    image
    @vballmvp,
    The reason I asked where you play. Look at this short vid of some different servers I got into. There are way more than a couple of high ping players. These are east and west us servers recorded on a weekend between 5 and 6am central.
  • Rev0verDrive
    4801 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    mmarkweII wrote: »
    @Rev0verDrive In your opinion, do you think it would be beneficial to run 3 instances (instead of 4) on a server to save resources for that server if/when needed?

    Subjectively yeah, why not? just split the resources evenly over 3 instances. Objectively I couldn't say without knowing certain aspects of the code structure and what the resources are and if there are allocations. optimally you want all 4 instances running efficiently. Cost issue. If they had to drop to 3, how would that impact rental costs?
  • denjoga
    443 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    edited May 10
    It's a known bug, because the devs know about it, me saying it's known, doesn't change any of that. They've publicly asked for help in finding the issue, that's how I know.

    It might've been the same bug pre-patch, might be the hit reg bug from bf4. It could be totally new. You don't know.

    Sorry, but there's no way that zero hit bug existed pre-patch.
    It is so severe - hits show in player animation but register no markers or damage - and consistent (when it happens - it's either there constantly or not at all, requiring quit and restart to resolve) that there would certainly have been a noticeable outcry in the forums and elsewhere if it had existed before the patch.
    I believe (but am too lazy to search it out; feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) that Mischkag stated that it was a bug that was introduced with the patch.
    If you look at the videos of the bug in action, it is so severe and blatant that there's just no way it would have gone unnoticed/unmentioned if it existed before the patch.

    (I don't know anything about a BF4 hit reg bug.)
  • KingTolapsium
    4912 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    denjoga wrote: »
    It's a known bug, because the devs know about it, me saying it's known, doesn't change any of that. They've publicly asked for help in finding the issue, that's how I know.

    It might've been the same bug pre-patch, might be the hit reg bug from bf4. It could be totally new. You don't know.

    Sorry, but there's no way that zero hit bug existed pre-patch.
    It is so severe - hits show in player animation but register no markers or damage - and consistent (when it happens - it's either there constantly or not at all, requiring quit and restart to resolve) that there would certainly have been a noticeable outcry in the forums and elsewhere if it had existed before the patch.
    I believe (but am too lazy to search it out; feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) that Mischkag stated that it was a bug that was introduced with the patch.
    If you look at the videos of the bug in action, it is so severe and blatant that there's just no way it would have gone unnoticed/unmentioned if it existed before the patch.

    (I don't know anything about a BF4 hit reg bug.)

    The bf4 "bullet sponge" bug was almost visually identical. Same thing could happen in bf1, but very rarely, I don't think I've seen it since the beta? Well before the patch anyways.

    It's possible reducing the frame history exposed this previously hidden bug.

    All I know is it exists, tracing it's origin doesn't really benefit us much. I'm more concerned with it getting fixed.
  • VBALL_MVP
    2911 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    edited May 11
    image
    @vballmvp,
    The reason I asked where you play. Look at this short vid of some different servers I got into. There are way more than a couple of high ping players. These are east and west us servers recorded on a weekend between 5 and 6am central.

    As @mmarkweII said I play US East, roughly around 10pm CST. I dont like playing above 60ms (doesnt feel smooth to me) so i avoid west. Usually see 2 per team 3 max....when playing a full server that's not much. Also I am basing that on many other people's comments across multiple threads.

    Not saying there are not instance that people have had more, as you illustrated, but the question is did it feel worse in those instances and what was Srvtick at those times.
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!