Lack of interpolation really kills games with a small community.

[nuNce]

Client side detection is phenomenal when it comes to shooters. It actually makes people who can shoot accurately to win. I don't care about dying behind corners, I care about people sprinting and dodging my bullets when my gun is pointed exactly at him. If you "die behind a corner" (which really isn't) it means that your enemy was skillful enough to point a gun over you and shoot on your body. This means that you get rewarded for your skill, not for some "guess how much you have to lead in relation to my ping" bull****.

 

[Reise]

Your strategy and reactions are meaningless because people can actually hit you when you're exposed?

Buddy, if I'm not exposed on my screen, how can I attempt to defend against that? I can't, and no one else can either. Even if I wasn't exposed, I'm already being forced to predict where I should BE just because I know I'm toast before the dice are even rolled. That guy with 500 ping is seeing and shooting at where I WAS, and is getting rewarded for his poor connection.

Pick your poison. Personally I choose the option that at least gives me my ability to move reliably throughout the game world without worrying if the server has caught up yet. Again, adjusting your aim (in one VERY specific case) is a small price to pay for having that reliability.

And I never feel like I earned a kill with ping compensation, because I know the guy I'm often shooting did NOT expect me to hit him. And rightly so.

 

[mattlach]

Buddy, if I'm not exposed on my screen, how can I attempt to defend against that? I can't, and no one else can either. Even if I wasn't exposed, I'm already being forced to predict where I should BE just because I know I'm toast before the dice are even rolled. That guy with 500 ping is seeing and shooting at where I WAS, and is getting rewarded for his poor connection.

Think of it this way.

The 500ms guy killed you in the past when you were exposed. (500ms + your ping in the past) it just didn't register on your screen until you ducked behind cover.

It doesn't really change the way you play the game from a taking cover perspective, but it does remove the guesswork when shooting.

Client side detection is phenomenal when it comes to shooters. It actually makes people who can shoot accurately to win. I don't care about dying behind corners, I care about people sprinting and dodging my bullets when my gun is pointed exactly at him. If you "die behind a corner" (which really isn't) it means that your enemy was skillful enough to point a gun over you and shoot on your body. This means that you get rewarded for your skill, not for some "guess how much you have to lead in relation to my ping" bull****.

Well, this isn't a run and gun game, so there are less "l33t skillz" of wrist snapping, and fast clicking than in other games. the skills that matter are more around strategy. Other than that - however - I agree with you perfectly.

 

[nuNce]

It doesn't really change the way you play the game from a taking cover perspective, but it does remove the guesswork when shooting.

Fact. Also having to lead because of ping makes zig-zagers even more effective, because a change of direction requires a huge change of aim. I personally think that if you are honest with yourself you'll never bother about the "being shot behind cover" problem, because you'll know that it was because of the enemy's skill who actually killed you because of it's good aiming. Having client side detection will only improve real strategy, get the game a lot less rushy and more tactical and will punish those running out of cover, making being stationary and on a prepared position an advantage, just like it is in real life.

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

But what about the player who is being shot at, who may be careful, running and dashing to cover, etc? There are two sides to any engagement...

 

[nuNce]

But what about the player who is being shot at, who may be careful, running and dashing to cover, etc? There are two sides to any engagement...

I seriously don't get it. He exposed himself and he was shot, there's nothing unfair in it. How many times is this going to happen? I mean, if you want a realistic game, and you have to choose one side of the stick, I'd go with the accurate shooting and some dying behind cover (which may well be explain as reacting a bit late to a hit, cause of adrenalin), rather than with the "I must shoot 1/2 a meter in front of my enemy because of ping" thing.

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

You are looking at it only from the shooters perspective, again there are two views to take into account. However, you can choose to see which ever you like.

In any case, players who may be having a problem because of their ping should try to play on more local servers. It is unfortunate if that can't be the case, but I have no sympathy for you if you think others who are playing more locally should suffer because of your choice of servers or location. Simple as that.

 

[mattlach]

You are looking at it only from the shooters perspective, again there are two views to take into account. However, you can choose to see which ever you like.

In any case, players who may be having a problem because of their ping should try to play on more local servers. It is unfortunate if that can't be the case, but I have no sympathy for you if you think others who are playing more locally should suffer because of your choice of servers or location. Simple as that.

But what we are saying is that the person who takes cover doesn't lose anything from this.

The whole "shot behind a corner thing" is really rare, and when it happens is not because the shooter is getting some sort of unfair advantage and seeing you when they shouldn't have.

It is because when they shot you, you WERE out in the open. Because of various delays in ping it just took a while for the notification for your computer to initiate the death animation to make its way from their computer, to the server to your computer.

This is a MUCH more fair and realistic arrangement than having to lead running enemies unrealistically far, as if you are shooting some sort of slow moving NERF darts...

 

[nuNce]

But what we are saying is that the person who takes cover doesn't lose anything from this.

The whole "shot behind a corner thing" is really rare, and when it happens is not because the shooter is getting some sort of unfair advantage and seeing you when they shouldn't have.

It is because when they shot you, you WERE out in the open. Because of various delays in ping it just took a while for the notification for your computer to initiate the death animation to make its way from their computer, to the server to your computer.

This is a MUCH more fair and realistic arrangement than having to lead running enemies unrealistically far, as if you are shooting some sort of slow moving NERF darts...

+1
Please, put this man head of some development team.

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

But what we are saying is that the person who takes cover doesn't lose anything from this.

The whole "shot behind a corner thing" is really rare, and when it happens is not because the shooter is getting some sort of unfair advantage and seeing you when they shouldn't have.

It is because when they shot you, you WERE out in the open. Because of various delays in ping it just took a while for the notification for your computer to initiate the death animation to make its way from their computer, to the server to your computer.

This is a MUCH more fair and realistic arrangement than having to lead running enemies unrealistically far, as if you are shooting some sort of slow moving NERF darts...

From the targets perspective, I would have to disagree. I could have gone around a corner, I could have dove prone, or other things that from a targets perspective, would put him in safety.

We could argue all day, and it won't change anyone's mind. I for one am glad it is the way it is now and I hope it doesn't change.

 

[ORYLY]

In a worst-case scenario of the shooter being a 250-pinger, the target loses about half a second of reaction time. Since movement in the game is slower than average, I don't think it'll be a common occurence when the target could have done something in that half second.

Now, if the target didn't even see the shooter when the target decided to run or peek then it was a completely fair hit. Half a second of delay would not have changed the target's valuation of the situation and his corresponding decision.

With lower pings(100-150), the "lost" time is even less. Also note we already have a delayed view in the current netcode. Client-side hit detection would double the view delay we already have.

 

[Mekhazzio]

Also note we already have a delayed view in the current netcode.

Yep. Where your client shows you isn't where the server has you at that moment. That's why you get 'shoved' when you run into enemies, your position is getting corrected to where the server wants you to be. You can "die behind cover" right now and find your corpse out in the open, it's just disgused by the heavy camera smack you get on receiving a killing shot and the sprawling the ragdolls do.

The average delay on client-side hit detection is going to be under a fifth of a second between what you do and when they see it. It's not double your ping, it's half your ping + server processing time + half their ping, since it's only going one way rather than round trip. I'm not sure what sort of gymnastics people think they're doing, that has them reacting to enemies in under a fifth of a second in any meaningful way. Just leaning back from around a corner can take almost that long. Going prone takes longer. If you're moving somewhere and suddenly decide, upon seeing an enemy appear halfway through, to take cover, that's generally a multiple-second action and any sort of networking delay is largely irrelevant to the outcome. The difference is that they'll actually have a pretty good chance to hit you, instead of you getting shielded by the deflection aura that a quick direction change grants. I'd say that's a fair reward for someone catching you with your pants down.

 

[mattlach]

Yep. Where your client shows you isn't where the server has you at that moment. That's why you get 'shoved' when you run into enemies, your position is getting corrected to where the server wants you to be. You can "die behind cover" right now and find your corpse out in the open, it's just disgused by the heavy camera smack you get on receiving a killing shot and the sprawling the ragdolls do.

The average delay on client-side hit detection is going to be under a fifth of a second between what you do and when they see it. It's not double your ping, it's half your ping + server processing time + half their ping, since it's only going one way rather than round trip. I'm not sure what sort of gymnastics people think they're doing, that has them reacting to enemies in under a fifth of a second in any meaningful way. Just leaning back from around a corner can take almost that long. Going prone takes longer. If you're moving somewhere and suddenly decide, upon seeing an enemy appear halfway through, to take cover, that's generally a multiple-second action and any sort of networking delay is largely irrelevant to the outcome. The difference is that they'll actually have a pretty good chance to hit you, instead of you getting shielded by the deflection aura that a quick direction change grants. I'd say that's a fair reward for someone catching you with your pants down.

This just highlights to me that while lag compensation is good, what really needs to happen is measures to reduce latencies overall. Right now many servers that are running RO2 games simply are not up to the task.

Based on TWI's own testing the server CPU with the fastest single core performance on the market (Xeon 1280/1290/1620/1660) are just barely fast enough to run a 64 player server properly, and I doubt many of the 64 player servers out there have this kind of hardware...

What we need is a good multithreaded server client. It probably won't happen as good multithreaded code is tough to write in a way that prevents thread locks and slowdowns and would take A LOT of work. Part of the problem is that they are using the ancient Unreal engine (yes its on version 3, but still)..

The time of relying on CPU's to clock higher and have higher IPC and on a single thread basis is coming to an end. The future lies in multithreaded code. I just wish someone would bite the bullet and write a good FPS engine that is properly multithreaded that everyone could use. Because if someone did, people would. The engine would be come the new gold standard.

 

[Holy.Death]

The whole "shot behind a corner thing" is really rare, and when it happens is not because the shooter is getting some sort of unfair advantage and seeing you when they shouldn't have.

It can be really annoying when the game realizes that "Oh, you're supposed to be dead now!" and you kiss the dirt even if you see that you have managed to get out alive. I hated it in Bad Company 2.

 

[nuNce]

This just highlights to me that while lag compensation is good, what really needs to happen is measures to reduce latencies overall. Right now many servers that are running RO2 games simply are not up to the task.

Sure, and we need lower ping connections but this ain't gonna happen in a blink of an eye. Atm our best option is to let people hit where they shoot, which is a fair and correct thing. Being killed behind a wall after running (which just to remind you is really a slight issue and in a slow paced game like RO2 is not going to bother the same way as in BFBC2) is not unfair at all on the other hand since the player who made the kill was perfectly aimed and shot correctly. What do we have now is a luck more than skill based shooter when it comes to trasversally moving enemies, since you have to guess your ping and his ping at that particular moment, and where with a full auto or semi auto weapon this is not a big issue, when using a bolt action it really kills the fun and becomes more frustrating the more you experience it. I don't really see the issue of sometimes getting kill JUST AFTER getting behind a wall. We're not talking about seconds, it's just a slight fraction and it won't be annoying at all, not when you finally get proper aiming ballistics when shooting. It's the best tradeoff we can get atm.

 

[mattlach]

From the targets perspective, I would have to disagree. I could have gone around a corner, I could have dove prone, or other things that from a targets perspective, would put him in safety.

And you would have done all of this in less than 500ms?

 

[Mekhazzio]

This just highlights to me that while lag compensation is good, what really needs to happen is measures to reduce latencies overall. Right now many servers that are running RO2 games simply are not up to the task.

This is another thing that client-side hit detection can help with. By offloading the ballistics calculations to the client, server performance will be improved just by having less stuff it has to do. It's a win-win for both improving general gameplay performance and helping out those servers that run beyond their capabilities. It's unquestionably an easier solution to implement than trying to split tasks up into concurrent threads without breaking the engine.

 

[UncleDrax]

This is another thing that client-side hit detection can help with. By offloading the ballistics calculations to the client, server performance will be improved just by having less stuff it has to do. It's a win-win for both improving general gameplay performance and helping out those servers that run beyond their capabilities. It's unquestionably an easier solution to implement than trying to split tasks up into concurrent threads without breaking the engine.

100% client side detection is bad. The server will still have to do some work to verify that the client is sending sane data. How much of a reduction in load that would be, I have no idea. How effective are anti-cheat measures like PB and VAC preventing cheating from lying clients, I have no idea.. (and it'd be a constant war between cheat-makers and anti-cheat app devs anyway.. always is)

While I can appreciate the frustration high ping players are experiencing right now, I'd be very interested to see empirical test using the current system... that could tell you things like, does playing on a under-populated server improve your clients perception? (if so, then it's likely the 'server too busy' issue because people are trying to get away with to much proc power they don't have)..
Can you find a "high-tick-rate" server.. any improvement? etc.

I like data.. I just do. Not that I'm in a position to do anything about it. .but still.. useful data helps people solve problems correctly. Anecdotal evidence, does not.

All of that said, Oz's internet does suck (I'm not bashing Aussies, I'm just stating a fact that they have comparability poor quantity of under sea cables, geographic issues, the Government likes to muck with the ISPs there requiring DPI, etc.. etc..), so I can understand the pain of persons stuck with using it for real-time applications.

 

[nuNce]

While I can appreciate the frustration high ping players are experiencing right now

Since when having 60 ping is high ping? Why do I have to anticipate half a meter in front of my enemy to shoot him at 100m?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=P-eiZMkQdjw#t=527s

 

[amdr]

Since when having 60 ping is high ping? Why do I have to anticipate half a meter in front of my enemy to shoot him at 100m?

[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=P-eiZMkQdjw#t=527s[/URL]

Argh just seeing that makes me annoyed about it. Lottery ftw :<