I'm convinced it's a programming error or bad choice of game engine perhaps. TWIs own servers suffer from this issue
citation please.
Odds are you have security hardware of software slowing down your connection and throttling your packets. Otherwise this does not happen.
I have tested our servers up and down slot numbers to find what ours can handle and have settled on 38
Having this number, pings dont rise, i have a 50 ping, there is no lag.
In my opinion a lot of this has to do with people trying to have to many slots on their servers, if we go to 40 slots on our servers pings start to rise.
Odds are you have security hardware of software slowing down your connection and throttling your packets. Otherwise this does not happen.
It has been suggested to me that it has something to do with game servers being insufficient to run the game.
Is that really it? If this is the case, I have yet to find a server powerful enough to run the game.
From other games I play I have come to expect the in-game latency to be pretty much the same as the game browser, or pinging a server from console.
I have come to expect - with my connection - to get between 18 and 25ms on servers in my general geographic area.
I have yet to play an RO2 server with below 80ms in-game latency (this would be considered barely playable in other games). The norm is more like 120 - 175ms, and occasionally its up in the 250-300 range.
What gives?
I feel like I', constantly shooting enemies with shots that CAN NOT MISS from relatively short distances over iron sights, and nothing...
Is there nothing that can be done to improve this? This is one of the biggest problems with the game right now IMHO.
Your ping in RO2 is calculated differently then the ping in a different online game. In the server browser you may see a ping of 35 for a server very close too you; that would be a ping comparable to other games. However, when you enter the game you'll see that ping rise as it now includes the time for the server to calculate your actions while playing.
So, for example, if a server has a 35ms ping in the browser (The actual time it takes for the signal to transport too you and back) and the server takes another 50ms to calculate all your actions, they would add up too an 85ms ping in-game. I know some other unreal engine games calculate ping in a similar fashion, Section 8rejudice & such, so it may be unique to the engine.
The devs tell us high ping servers are a franchise of 3rd party dedicated servers, which makes perfect sense too me. TWI can afford to get the best quality hardware to host their servers (Those intel Xeon things with 4ghz turbo) while an average player won't have that available. When a clan or individual tries to host their own server, they often over estimate how powerful the server hardware is and give it a player slot limit that's simply too high.
Heck, even I tried hosting a 16 slot server on a pentium 4 with very poor results. The server side for RO2 is simply very processor intensive. When the server fills up, the hardware starts to struggle with all the processing requirement and pings raise an exponential amount.
This is why I avoid 64 player servers that aren't officially hosted or ones that I personally trust.
I don't know how many times this has been explained....yet it continues to fall upon deaf ears....Your ping in RO2 is calculated differently then the ping in a different online game. In the server browser you may see a ping of 35 for a server very close too you; that would be a ping comparable to other games. However, when you enter the game you'll see that ping rise as it now includes the time for the server to calculate your actions while playing.
So, for example, if a server has a 35ms ping in the browser (The actual time it takes for the signal to transport too you and back) and the server takes another 50ms to calculate all your actions, they would add up too an 85ms ping in-game. I know some other unreal engine games calculate ping in a similar fashion, Section 8rejudice & such, so it may be unique to the engine.
Even with the state of the art hardware there a issues on certain maps when the server is loaded, arty is falling, tanks are battling, etc. But generally on those servers that are properly set up, while the pings rise, the gameplay is generally playable most of the map. On lessor servers, not so much. And then too, some of not-so-high-end player computers simply have problems with larger player numbers, yet they continue to play on the large capacity servers.The devs tell us high ping servers are a franchise of 3rd party dedicated servers, which makes perfect sense too me. TWI can afford to get the best quality hardware to host their servers (Those intel Xeon things with 4ghz turbo) while an average player won't have that available. When a clan or individual tries to host their own server, they often over estimate how powerful the server hardware is and give it a player slot limit that's simply too high. Heck, even I tried hosting a 16 slot server on a pentium 4 with very poor results. The server side for RO2 is simply very processor intensive. When the server fills up, the hardware starts to struggle with all the processing requirement and pings raise an exponential amount. This is why I avoid 64 player servers that aren't officially hosted or ones that I personally trust.
I hope that helps clear some things up.
Doesn't matter, but in my opinion 80ms is fine for pretty much every game except Quake 3 insta-gib on a fairly high level, lol. Even Counterstrike is perfectly playable with 80ms. Anyway...I have yet to play an RO2 server with below 80ms in-game latency (this would be considered barely playable in other games).
I have higher latency in RO (1 and 2, btw.) than in most other games as well. No idea why, but it's always been like that so I don't really expect it to change.The norm is more like 120 - 175ms, and occasionally its up in the 250-300 range.
That's also due to bad hit registration over short distances. Last I heard TWI were aware of this and working on it.I feel like I', constantly shooting enemies with shots that CAN NOT MISS from relatively short distances over iron sights, and nothing...
http://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/showthread.php?t=57434http://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/showthread.php?t=57434Server Requirements (Beta)
16 Players: Haven't benchmarked this yet, but we don't expect it will take much CPU to run this
32 Players: CPU usage - 1 Core of a 2.6 GHZ Core I7 or equivalent (i.e. the server process will take most of 1 core, with a few smaller threads on other cores). We also tested on an Intel Core2 Quad Q8400 @ 2.66GHz and that could handle 32 players but I wouldn't try and do 32 players with a machine much slower than that.
64 Players: Goal CPU usage - 1 Core of a Intel Xeon E3-1270 3.4 GHZ (3.8 GHZ actually with Turbo enabled) or equivalent (i.e. the server process will take most of 1 core, with a few smaller threads on other cores).
A note on performance:
64 players was pushing the test machine (Intel Xeon E3-1270 3.4 GHZ (3.8 GHZ actually with Turbo enabled) pretty hard on certain maps, but did handle 64 players. Likewise 32 players pushed the Intel Core2 Quad Q8400 @ 2.66GHz pretty hard at 32 players, but did handle it. We're working on some final optimizations that might get the performance a little better, but there won't be any drastic changes from these specs.
If you have a server with that cpu, or one of equivalent or greater power, it should be able to run a 64 slot server pretty seamlessly. I trust TWI to do this properly, though kentucky fried goulash seems to do exceptionally well also.Intel Xeon E3-1270 3.4 GHZ (3.8 GHZ actually with Turbo enabled).
Can you provide the ini settings on client side you mentioned. Further more, will changing these values have a negative impact when playing on servers that did not double their tickrate?
It has been suggested that trying 32 play servers may be a better idea. I will try this, but it removes some of the greatness of the game to me.
The devs tell us high ping servers are a franchise of 3rd party dedicated servers, which makes perfect sense too me.
While I appreciate the detailed answer, in my personal experience this is completely wrong. On average I find the TWI servers running 64 players are just as bad as everyone else. Same high server browser pings, same lag spikes. Other players in game report the same thing. The issue is not limited to poorly configured hardware, unless TWI's qualifies.
Server Requirements (Beta)
16 Players: Haven't benchmarked this yet, but we don't expect it will take much CPU to run this
32 Players: CPU usage - 1 Core of a 2.6 GHZ Core I7 or equivalent (i.e. the server process will take most of 1 core, with a few smaller threads on other cores). We also tested on an Intel Core2 Quad Q8400 @ 2.66GHz and that could handle 32 players but I wouldn't try and do 32 players with a machine much slower than that.
64 Players: Goal CPU usage - 1 Core of a Intel Xeon E3-1270 3.4 GHZ (3.8 GHZ actually with Turbo enabled) or equivalent (i.e. the server process will take most of 1 core, with a few smaller threads on other cores).
A note on performance:
64 players was pushing the test machine (Intel Xeon E3-1270 3.4 GHZ (3.8 GHZ actually with Turbo enabled) pretty hard on certain maps, but did handle 64 players. Likewise 32 players pushed the Intel Core2 Quad Q8400 @ 2.66GHz pretty hard at 32 players, but did handle it. We're working on some final optimizations that might get the performance a little better, but there won't be any drastic changes from these specs.
How I read this.
Even the Xeon E-1270 (fastest server processor money can buy for single threaded applications) is marginal for a 64 player server.
This seems to suggest that what they are trying to do can not be effectively done with current server hardware without a complete rewrite of the server engine for multithreading.
It would - however - be interesting to see how it would run on one of those watercooled overclocked core i5-2500K's at 5Ghz. It will have fewer threads and less cache than the Xeon, but it should beat it in raw single threaded performance.
Seeing that TWI did not write their own engine, but rather based the game on an existing Unreal 3 engine, the chances of seeing a multithreaded server and thus good playable 64 player servers are close to nil.
This is sad.
That should not be a concern to anyone who plays this game. As long as someone on your team gets the kill, it furthers the team goal. This game is not about individual performance. K/D ratio, number of kills, etc. don't matter. It's all about the team meeting its objectives.![]()
I wonder what it would take to implement them retroactively. A relatively simple recompile, or a complete rewrite...
I'm assuming you don't have any experience in programming, but decently multi-threaded code isn't easy to do. In fact it's a pain in the arse. There is a reason we've had multi-core machines commonly in machines for many years without a matching increase in software utilisation.
Here's what we found:
1. the variation in the amount of "leading" having to be done for shooting targets became much less and overall became more consistent.
2. we could swear we were able to see more bullet strikes/impacts.
3. for the lack of a better way of putting things........it seemed like bullets now "flew faster"?
All of those things made for a much more enjoyable gaming experience.
We've even had (although we are located in central Canada) people from the EU playing in our server who noticed a difference.
While we believe (as do some other clans who've also made those changes) that this has benefitted our server all of this may in fact mean nothing.......
Can you provide the ini settings on client side you mentioned. Further more, will changing these values have a negative impact when playing on servers that did not double their tickrate?