Good post, Shumi.
I've also experienced this. Considering I'm an Australian and my clan's server is American you'd be inclined to say it was simply ping difference. However, I've been in several of the exact same circumstances as Shumi with hit registration completely non-existent.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moving on, slightly off topic, but nevertheless (the title does say netcode):
More of a gripe than anything is the lack of anti-lag (ping compensation) for this game. Please, this is not a flame. It's a personal concern presented in a reasonable manner and I felt obliged to offer my two cents on it. And please correct me if I'm wrong here... if these corrections were done in a similarly amicable fashion that would be pleasing =)
I read the response of the dev reponsible for netcode (my apologies for not remembering your name!) when he posted on the issue a couple of months back. As far as I remember, I found his response completely unsatisfactory; being mainly along the lines of "it is unrealistic to be killed, or appear to be killed, by a high ping player when you've already taken cover or are around a corner". That was the gist I got. There may have been some more complicated issues that I didn't understand, or are behind the scenes. I also recognise that I'm in a minority (international players in a clan) and I completely understand that TWI isn't expected to cater for me alone. It is, however, incredibly frustrating to take a corner and be killed because the bullet you fired hasn't even registered with the server.
On the the first issue - appearances are evidently deceptive. Without anti-lag, the unfortunate high-pinger must manually adjust for both the movement of the enemy player (a realistic requirement for lead) AND ALSO for the bullet delay (not realistic). At 100 yrds in the game this is almost equivalent to a full inch on a monitor if the target is moving quickly at 90*. In CQB this anticipation is next to impossible, as the player could be darting any direction. Forgetting CQB, take a typical example. Player A (in a window) shooting at Player B (crossing a street). If player A is a high ping player, then without anti-lag he has to lead off (as above) drastically decreasing the area (and time) in which he has to take the shot. Nevertheless he makes it and feels good about himself. The dead player thinks "boy oh boy, that guy got me good" or something else pleasant. Now consider the example with anti-lag. The high-ping player has the luxury of aiming with a realistic lead at the enemy and makes the shot again. However this time the opposition player is slightly nonplussed as to him, at least ostensibly, he was around the corner.
Evidently, the appearence of what happened is completely irrelevant. Player B was killed in the middle of the street on both occassions. The second one just happened to be fairer for the high-ping player when all things are considered.
Many games (we all know the ones) have successfully implemented the use of anti-lag which, quite successfully, allows gamplay to flow completely unhindered while providing the opportunity for disadvantaged gamers like myself to actually compete on a level playing field. I realise RO1 didn't have anti-lag either (yes, I own it, play it, and love it). But that was 2k6. RO1 also didn't have zoom, nice graphics, accessible gameplay, more realistic weapon handling and lovely artillery and gore effects - which are, to my mind, fantastic improvements all around.
What are people's thoughts on this? <- not a hollow statement, unlike most people who ask that question I'm genuinely interested in the response others have to offer.
--If this was completely irrelevant someone please draw my attention to it and I'll begin a new post.
Cheers,
Wally
