• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

Leading for ping is ridiculous, Mk.2: An Example

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sort by date Sort by votes
#61
Well i dont know much about technic stuff, but i know that yesterday on Spartanovka @160 ping and full 64 slot server i cant hit **** with my DP-28 at some 100 to 150 meters. When Germans are running toward me it ok, but runing sideways or little zig-zag makes them imposible to hit. I fired whole drum at a German runing open field ( short bursts, shooting in front of him and trying to predict compenzation for him running and my ping.. ) and all i managed is to supress him? Or being shot multiple times while prone and zoomed from a guy that peaks from a corner im covering with MG? He shots me like a dog and im comfident that he is dead duck - I fired at least two short bursts, hitting him with 2-3 rounds?
Something is defenetly wrong, and my solution, as a MG player is to decrease movement speed :D
 
Upvote 0
#62
I am totally against a lag compensation system for RO2. I can play UT fine without one, so why should i need one in this slower game?

get the server admins to increase the tickrate to 40 or even 50, wait for Tripwire to fix the (still to be proven existent) ping issues on servers with a lot of players, play on servers located near you and everything will be fine.
 
Upvote 0
#63
+1 to OP (Mekhazzio's post).

Don't know about the technical side of things (not that tech savvy), but from regular player's side of things, and I've observed this happening time after time in RO2, the problem of bullet lag is very real and is something that should be fixed somehow. And fast. This annoying problem with the bullet lag has made me think about quitting RO2, even though I'd really love to continue playing it. If RO2 intends to be a realistic shooter with realistic ballistics, slow-motion bullet flight times need to be fixed.

As the pings are always quite high with RO2 (when compared to pings I get with other online FPS games) and the bullet lag so pronounced, I rarely even try to shoot at a laterally running enemies any more as hitting one is purely based on luck.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#65
Mekhazzio said:
You're talking about aim & tracking. That's something else entirely, and is somewhat irrelevant to the discussion about zig-zags in this thread. What's being discussed is that even with 100% perfect accuracy and tracking from the player, the networking can still produce misses, because, in the projectile's latency-added time of flight, the required aimpoint can shift by a much greater distance than the target size. The technical mechanics of how the shot functions in the game has a huge effect on the outcome even when you entirely remove human error from the equation.

To put it simply, the networking can make even an aimbot miss. When that's possible, what hope does a human have?
Click to expand...

I have no doubt that this is an issue.

However, my rub is with posts like this.

"Anyone who zig-zags understands the network latency mechanic, or at least the practical results of it, which is why we do it. "

Which brings up my original point: This isn't completely true. Zig-zag is primarily a tactic to throw off the enemy's aim. To assume "everyone who zig-zags understands" RO2's network deficiency and is purposely exploiting the game, is false. Are there some who do this; yes. Was zig zagging developed as an exploit to purposely game networking code? Not even close.

I could refer to occams razor, but I think it would be a bit redundant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Reise, defektive and r5cya
Upvote 0
#66
DiedTrying said:
I have no doubt that this is an issue.

However, my rub is with posts like this.

"Anyone who zig-zags understands the network latency mechanic, or at least the practical results of it, which is why we do it. "

Which brings up my original point: This isn't completely true. Zig-zag is primarily a tactic to throw off the enemy's aim. To assume "everyone who zig-zags understands" RO2's network deficiency and is purposely exploiting the game, is false. Are there some who do this; yes. Was zig zagging developed as an exploit to purposely game networking code? Not even close.

I could refer to occams razor, but I think it would be a bit redundant.
Click to expand...

I agree, players have been zigzagging in games for years and years for the simple fact it makes it harder for them to be hit. That is nothing new. If anything, I would like to see some penalty for sudden extreme direction changes.
 
Upvote 0
#67
DiedTrying said:
I have no doubt that this is an issue.

However, my rub is with posts like this.

"Anyone who zig-zags understands the network latency mechanic, or at least the practical results of it, which is why we do it. "

Which brings up my original point: This isn't completely true. Zig-zag is primarily a tactic to throw off the enemy's aim. To assume "everyone who zig-zags understands" RO2's network deficiency and is purposely exploiting the game, is false. Are there some who do this; yes. Was zig zagging developed as an exploit to purposely game networking code? Not even close.

I could refer to occams razor, but I think it would be a bit redundant.
Click to expand...
Alternatively, I could ask you not to be a supercilious arse, but I think that would be a bit redundant too.

Anyone who zig-zags at close range will clearly experience a far higher degree of survivability when in the face of enemy fire than they would have reasonably expected to be the case. From that point on the primary reason they choose to zig-zag at close range -- an act which would at first be a notionally incongruous thing to be doing if one is only considering real life physics -- is because they experience the practical benefits of doing so, even if they don
 
  • Like
Reactions: DiedTrying and r5cya
Upvote 0
#68
=GG= Mr Moe said:
I agree, players have been zigzagging in games for years and years for the simple fact it makes it harder for them to be hit. That is nothing new. If anything, I would like to see some penalty for sudden extreme direction changes.
Click to expand...

Remember RO mod 2.0 or something? They had that penalty and it was awesome. But they removed it due to complaints it was like ice skating. Pitty, it just needed tweaking.
 
Upvote 0
#70
r5cya said:
how come you posted a video showing you getting shot while running past a window, saying it's about you getting hit "around a corner"? you run past a window with an mg covering it and get shot and fall dead. nothing unusual there. :confused:
Click to expand...

Especially not since RO2 actually has bulletpenetration for mgs (and in that type of wall not for rifles).
 
  • Like
Reactions: THD
Upvote 0
#72
Mekhazzio said:
Heck, if RO2 similarly delayed your client's firing animation for your latency like Q1 did, I'd probably be somewhat less annoyed by it. At least then, you'd get immediate feedback as to what's really happening instead of having to review events frame-by-frame later to know wtf is going on.
Click to expand...

In theory that sounds very good, and that's actually the way it worked in Unreal 1 also. But once UT99 came out and changed it (to how it works in RO2), there was no looking back for me. I just found the "old" style in unreal 1 distracting. Delaying the firing animation to show when you actually fired is little help, since it won't be pointing where you actually fired. All it would do is show latency, and you get a decent enough feel for that by simply observing bullet impacts.

But then that's my view. This is one of those areas where there frankly is no right or wrong. It all comes down to preference (and to a degree, internet connection).
 
Upvote 0
#73
defektive said:
Alternatively, I could ask you not to be a supercilious arse, but I think that would be a bit redundant too.

Anyone who zig-zags at close range will clearly experience a far higher degree of survivability when in the face of enemy fire than they would have reasonably expected to be the case. From that point on the primary reason they choose to zig-zag at close range -- an act which would at first be a notionally incongruous thing to be doing if one is only considering real life physics -- is because they experience the practical benefits of doing so, even if they don’t fully understand why. People zig-zag because evidence proves it to be the simplest means of staying alive; that’s not an over-simplification, it’s a fact.
Click to expand...

Your telling me people zig-zag because prior experience tells them it's effective??? Tell me something I don't already know. Also not sure where you are getting this "over-simplification" bit from. I never argued that it was oversimplified.

again, the point of zig-zagging is to make you a harder target. Just because people realized recently that RO2 has shoddy netcode and are using zig-zagging to exploit it doesn't mean that zig zagging's original intent is an exploit.

It's a standard gaming tactic (i use it in open fields/long range combat) that just so happens to exploit RO2's netcode. That doesn't mean everyone who zig-zags knows it's "cheating" or that zig-zagging has always been an exploit in every game.

but yes, RO2 should have better physics to prevent the twitching zig zag we see now. I thought the game was supposed to have "momentum" in player movement?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#74
DiedTrying said:
again, the point of zig-zagging is to make you a harder target. Just because people realized recently that RO2 has shoddy netcode and are using zig-zagging to exploit it doesn't mean that zig zagging's original intent is an exploit.
Click to expand...
Who said that the original intent behind zig-zagging was in order to exploit the game? If you're refering back to this...

"Anyone who zig-zags understands the network latency mechanic, or at least the practical results of it, which is why we do it."

...where does that say anything about original intent? It's an accurate statement about the way the game is being played today. I don't understand why you need to condescend with reference to Ockham's Razor when the above statement is evidential and accurate.

DiedTrying said:
It's a standard gaming tactic (i use it in open fields/long range combat) that just so happens to exploit RO2's netcode. That doesn't mean everyone who zig-zags knows it's "cheating" or that zig-zagging has always been an exploit in every game
Click to expand...
I know, which is why I said that if they don't know that the netcode is poor in this regard ("...or at least the practical results of it..." - the part you cropped out when you were trying to prop up your point) they do learn that zig-zagging in general keeps them alive longer, even when it really shouldn't.

In many other FPS zig-zagging at close range is far less effective, so yes, when people zig-zag at close range in RO2 they do so because RO2 affords them unrealistic survivability in doing so.

What's wrong with that statement?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#75
r5cya said:
how come you posted a video showing you getting shot while running past a window, saying it's about you getting hit "around a corner"? you run past a window with an mg covering it and get shot and fall dead. nothing unusual there. :confused:
Click to expand...
You get it :) I don't need to explain this to you, then, but for others who might not be following what it means...

The purpose of the video was to demonstrate the delay between where the hit is delivered and where my client displayed me when it heard about the hit. Note the position of my corpse in the death cam at the very end, at the bench by the far wall. I was, of course, actually shot and killed while in front of the window, because the walls of that building are bulletproof, as the video verifies in the beginning. However, because my client was happily performing its duty at letting me appear to move around freely (it does this to make movement feel more natural under latency), I appear, to myself only, to keep running past the window for my latency period. That time discrepancy creates the visual illusion that I was not hit until I was at the bench. The other player, naturally, saw the reality of it as the server saw it: I dropped dead in front of the window.

That visual illusion of "dying behind cover" is what some people, such as Reise and Freezy in this thread, consider the major drawback of a latency compensation method. Posting that video was intended to demonstrate that latency compensation is not the only source of it. Dying behind cover already exists in RO2 as we have it right now. Sure, latency compensation can potentially make it "worse", by increasing the potential time delay between when you're exposed and when you hear about getting shot while exposed. That is why, when recording that video, I specifically chose a server I where I had a 280ms ping, exactly double the latency that I found as the average on the 2FJg server the other day. It was intended to show what the average "dying around a corner" scenario might look like, if we had latency compensation. As you can see, it's not much, because RO2 players move pretty slowly.

And as you immediately caught on to, I wasn't dying around the corner, I was dying because an MG shot me before I even got to the corner. It's rather obvious. But that phenomenon, what I show in that video, is what some people have argued is so heinous that it must be prevented at all costs. Even Ramm-Jaeger, the TWI guy in charge of the netcode, has said he considers that a huge problem. They have come right out and said that, to them, it's worth the flawed shooting mechanics we have now, just to stop "dying around a corner".

I personally find that a truly bizarre opinion, but eh, that's kind of the point of opinions. The problem, of course, is that what we have now ruins the shooting mechanics but still doesn't stop "dying around a corner", so it's a lose/lose situation for us all.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: THD and Reise
Upvote 0
#76
I was referring to your very first statement when you said everyone who zig zags knows they are exploiting RO2's net code. "Anyone who zig-zags understands the network latency mechanic, or benefit from it's effects"

That's not true. A lot of people including myself zig-zag because its a common tactic, not because we know it's an exploit. Also most games dont have the netcode issues RO2 does in this regard so you can't just make the blanket statement that players unknowingly exploit netcode (Hell I zig-zag in single player, how am I exploiting netcode then?)

Are there some who do exploit it in RO2? Sure, but I wouldn't go so far as labeling everyone who zig-zags as an exploiter.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#77
DiedTrying said:
I was referring to your very first statement when you said everyone who zig zags knows they are exploiting RO2's net code.
That's not true.
Click to expand...
Did you even read my-

You know what, forget it; it's not worth the aggravation. Read what you want to read. We fundamentally agree, which is something to take away from this at least.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frostedfire
Upvote 0
#78
DiedTrying said:
but yes, RO2 should have better physics to prevent the twitching zig zag we see now. I thought the game was supposed to have "momentum" in player movement?
Click to expand...
It does! Quite a bit, in fact. Try doing a 180 while sprinting. Despite the sprint speed in RO2 being fairly slow from a realism perspective, you continue sliding (backwards) in the direction you were going before coming to a stop, and then have to build speed in the opposite direction. It takes about a second and a half to actually start gaining distance in the new direction.

But that's only half of the recipe. RO2 is, to its credit, a very high-precision game in its ballistics. Bullets are pinpoint-sized objects and player hitboxes are tight and take into account different body locations. It takes only a little error to make a big difference in the outcome of a shot...and the networking introduces rather a lot of error. It doesn't take huge changes in movement to throw off a shot, very small ones will suffice. Approaching the problem from the direction of player physics is not going to be the solution, unless you want to make the character movement so rigid that it feels like it's a battlemech game :D
 
Upvote 0
#79
defektive said:
Did you even read my-

You know what, forget it; it's not worth the aggravation. Read what you want to read. We fundamentally agree, which is something to take away from this at least.
Click to expand...

I did read, you imply that the hidden effects of lag are a reinforcer for future zig-zagging behavior.

which isn't very sound scientifically.

Not only is there no netcode in singleplayer, but some MP games don't have the "hit detection" issues that RO2 has.

So to say players unknowingly benefit from lag and that's the cause for zig-zagging isn't always true. I'd have to say a player is more likely to attribute his survival based on throwing off the enemies aim, rather than thinking, "Oh hey, I lived because I did 'the matrix' and exploited server latency."
 
Upvote 0
#80
I'm new on this forum.
I've just registered to look for some answers and this thread kinda helped.
I'm a RO fan since it was a mod for ut2004 and kept on playing till this new RO came out. If I understand correctly your words (I'm italian), this' simply a netcoding problem which I had with other games too when they came out (maybe ut2003 or 2004?).
Thanks for your good job.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Community News
Forums
Merch
Menu