GameplayDevUFC. Are you sure the game doesn't have any netcode compensation?

[manliest_Man]

I don't know if it's allowed to request conversations with devs and i don't know if GameplayDevUFC still hangs around in this forum, haven't seen him post in a while, but i remember having a conversation about the netcode with him and he explained how there is absolutely no compensation with the game's netcode, thus the lag/delay etc. the more unstable or far away a connection is to another player.

3 weird things i've noticed that don't add up or make sense from what GameplayDevUFC has explained in the past.

To my knowledge, the game has absolutely no netcode compensation and everything is peer-to-peer according to a few conversations that took place in this forum.

Those 3 things are these and i urge others to test them out themselves or talk about simillar experiences:

1) Well today i played a game with someone and we talked for a while and played about an hour and he was playing from the East Coast of the US and i was playing from an island in Greece. He had a cable for his ps4 and i had wifi with my wifi being no more than 1 meter away from my ps4 and my connection is nearly flawless for my country's standards and for the range from the router.

That's 1 thing that made me wanna post this today. The game we played had absolutely no lag or delay, which is weird, because if i play other online games my ping is terrible when playing against people from the west coast of the US let alone from the East coast.

2) I've tested this myself: i have my ps4 + router on my living room, but 3-4 times i've moved my ps4 on to my room which is a big distance from the router and the wifi signal is definitely lost with noticable drop on stuff like my phone or laptop. It's so far away my phone disconnects some times due to distance. Yet whenever i played with a long distanced wifi from my room i got to play for sessions of more than 2-3 hours and i could instantly find games in quick match and the game played smooth as butter, as if i was playing offline with a bot or a friend.

I urge you to try this yourselves. Try playing via wifi and make sure you play at a distance where the wifi signal is worsen (for example my phone has 4 lines of wifi signal and when i go to my room it has 1 or 2 at best, that's where i had my ps4)

3) Weird scenarios where strikes are supposed to cancel an opponent's spinning strike or an opponent's transition, yet they end up hitting em, dealing damage(i've even KO'ed someone who transitioned after i KO'ed him) and the guy being hit, is able to keep transitioning uninterupted by a strike that should interupt.

Indicating that possibly i see my strike land on my screen, but the enemy manages to transition on his screen so i see my strike as uneffective.

I thought it had to do with someone having low stamina on the thai clinch for example, where it mainly happens, where your opponent has you in the mauy thai throwing knees to the head/body, yet you still are able to transition out of it, even after he hits you a few momments before you complete the transition.

Has any of you had simillar occurances?

GameplayDevUFC have i misunderstood what you said about the game's network/netcode? The guy i played with today, we talked and it was like 6 pm for him while it was 2 am for me. 8 Hours away and we played some flawless games with no network issues whatsoever.

On the other hand, i've played with people from the UK/France/Ireland/Russia/West Coast and i've had countless of issues with em.

Can anyone explain this?



Edit:

Another 4th thing that raises some red flags. I know for a fact that sound/commentary is different on each player's ps4. I've heared people with crappy headsets leaving their mic on or smth and you can hear from their end different type of commentating than on your screen.

Indicating that the game is not 100% running on a simulation on both consoles as the same, since the sound is different, but this couldn't mean much, since the sound could be a local thing, since it doesn't affect the visuals/gameplay.

[manliest_Man]

P.S. Again sorry if i break any rule by making a post and specifically asking a dev to explain something to me. Didn't mean any harm, if i did break any rule, feel free to delete this post, i'll try to repost this experience without specifically asking GameplayDevUFC to explain this weird situation here.


P.S 2 The guy i was talking to, was talking to me about playing with other europeans like Irish people or French and he had network issues with most of em and we were both suprised at how smooth the game played for our distance.

It was a random guy i met on quick match and we had a good scrap and added him and played some more games. I am fairly sure he wasn't trolling or anything about his whereabouts.

[oshighwayman]

ufcdev said there s some lag compensation based on average ping in sub minigame
that block is real time and standup doesnt have any lag comp
than they changed something with amount of lost packets, so game appears to be less laggy, but in real it s still lagging

p2p is horrible for random connections, and sub minigame is pretty much totally broken for me like half of time

they really need to do something about this

i dont know about this game, but i remember lag compensation in COD series somehow favours wifi connections over wired ones, it s weird

about wifi u meontining, i only know people were talking about adjusting their upload/download for getting on good side of lag compensation in COD, which is P2P, but i also remember that lag comp used in Battlefield 3 with dedicated servers was somehow favouring laggers, but was overall much more better experience than P2p COD system

[SUGATA]

Quote: Originally Posted by oshighwayman

ufcdev said there s some lag compensation based on average ping in sub minigame that block is real time and standup doesnt have any lag comp than they changed something with amount of lost packets, so game appears to be less laggy, but in real it s still lagging p2p is horrible for random connections, and sub minigame is pretty much totally broken for me like half of time they really need to do something about this i dont know about this game, but i remember lag compensation in COD series somehow favours wifi connections over wired ones, it s weird

COD is not p2p it is on dedicated servers
There are some ways to solve lags in p2p, check my thread about network

[Dave_S]

blocking is near real time in about 30% of my online matches. This is probably apples to bananas, but when I play gran turismo online lag is pretty much non-existent. if someone is lagging in a room it's only them that are effected, but GT uses dedicated servers.

sometimes it takes nearly a second after I input a command for my character to perform that move.


Not complaining, just saying. I don't play ranked too much, if I played ranked more I'd be more mad at lag. I've just seen it so many times I've become accustom to it. What I can't handle is artards that know they are lagging taunting and talking trash, sending messages.

I'm guessing this will be locked before gpd could reply if he was so inclined though.

[oshighwayman]

Quote: Originally Posted by SUGATA

COD is not p2p it is on dedicated servers There are some ways to solve lags in p2p, check my thread about network

only PC
consoles got hybrid system i think from BO2, i know for sure that MW3 was p2p and BO1 too, BO2 got very very few times dedicated servers, so u can say it was p2p , they re not exactly spending money on dedis for console players.
as for AW and BO3 i really regreat buying those games because i just dont play them and there re last ones i ever bought. never bought Ghosts.
MW2 had netcode and lag comp. favouring host
then they messed up everything trying to cut that out so lot of people with good connections/hosts had extremely bad conditions in MW3
as for AW that being pathetic crappy wannabe Halo nonsense with horrible online lag
BF with dedis wins here on all fronts, at least bullets dont disapear

that "hybrid" system is in my experience big lie, there re suppossed to be "some" dedis for console players, but once capacity is reached it goes back to p2p. it s pathetic and it s shame that franchise with so many millions of dollars lying around "cant afford" dedis.. u know what they re just greedy

yes u can do things for p2p better, that s basically lag comp. trying to rubber band all crazy things happening between two players with different connections

i dont know what happened with this game, if it was rushed, or they didnt have money to finish or what, but many parts of game feels like unfinished beta

[SUGATA]

Quote: Originally Posted by oshighwayman

only PC consoles got hybrid system i think from BO2, i know for sure that MW3 was p2p and BO1 too, BO2 got very very few times dedicated servers, so u can say it was p2p , they re not exactly spending money on dedis for console players. as for AW and BO3 i really regreat buying those games because i just dont play them and there re last ones i ever bought. never bought Ghosts. MW2 had netcode and lag comp. favouring host then they messed up everything trying to cut that out so lot of people with good connections/hosts had extremely bad conditions in MW3 as for AW that being pathetic crappy wannabe Halo nonsense with horrible online lag BF with dedis wins here on all fronts, at least bullets dont disapear that "hybrid" system is in my experience big lie, there re suppossed to be "some" dedis for console players, but once capacity is reached it goes back to p2p. it s pathetic and it s shame that franchise with so many millions of dollars lying around "cant afford" dedis.. u know what they re just greedy yes u can do things for p2p better, that s basically lag comp. trying to rubber band all crazy things happening between two players with different connections i dont know what happened with this game, if it was rushed, or they didnt have money to finish or what, but many parts of game feels like unfinished beta

I played long time with my clan i Ghost Recon Future Soldier (GRFS), we played clan wars with US players also.

GRFS is P2P with dedicated servers only for matchmaking and leaderboard.

This is the solution how to become Host in P2P for squad based games (more than 2 players in match), this is just a copy-past but may be helpful for you:

How to become a Host:


- Make NAT1 (letter - O). Game prioritizes players with open NAT (NAT1, O) as Host. O means open NAT (NAT1), M means moderate NAT (NAT2), S means strict NAT (NAT3). Make sure you don't have a S.


- Impossible to have NAT1 and letter O (open) thought my ROUTER (max is Nat 2 and letter M), w/o: 1) direct RJ45 connection, or 2) my ISP provide me more than one IP address so i can use the router in Bridge mode or use a Switch instead (it doesn't matter you are using a router or not, not a router cause you have NAT2, but the private IP did).


- Join lobby first. 1st team does have the better chance for one of their players being Host.


- When you play online - do not have any other Internet traffic.


- Phoenix (top US player) is usually a Host; NAT1, O, DMZ. UPnP not available.


- Not really depending on the Speed of internet connection (we always have the same member being the host, while he is not the fastest connection nor slowest connection).




2) When I am a Host:
- no “Waiting for players” at the start of the Round.
- you spawn instantly.


3) When I am NOT a Host:
- my initial 1-2 bullets gives blood splatter, but no Hitmarkers, that means the bullet doesn't count. (Burst firing and Single firing with L22A2/VSS – useless versus ARs & SMGs spraying).
- If someone on your team is host: you should know at the start because that player will spawn 3-4 seconds before everyone else.


4) Ubisoft servers:
- GRFS servers - track stats and run the lobbies before and after the games.
- Now lags become worse than before because: there's less and less players in my region playing and I am now playing against and with many more people that are far away from me, so when they become a Host, the lag is worse.


5) Determing a Host (game algorythm):
? - the game prioritizes players with NAT1 to be the host.
- Step 1 - The game selects a player to be a Host, he has completely all open ports means to which everyone will be able to connect (the best option - DMZ). This is the 1st priority - the existence of the DMZ (max count of open ports). If we are without 11 Russian DMZ and 1 American with a DMZ, then the game selects his as a host, and we all suffer lag (example with us player Phoenix among us when we played 2 Russian groups, he became the host).
- Step 2 - If several players with DMZ, then the game selects the Host of the one who is closer to the other players with DMZ (one region). This is the 2nd priority - the number of players with a DMZ region. If we are 6 and I am one with the DMZ, and the Americans 6 including 2-3 with a DMZ, then the game will choose one of them, and we will lag.

CONCLUSION: We all need to make a DMZ PS3 settings and router!

[GameplayDevUFC]

Quote: Originally Posted by Dave_S

I'm guessing this will be locked before gpd could reply if he was so inclined though.

I'm not.

I've explained the network model in great detail, and gone over the lag compensation aspects several times.

For some reason, people still convince themselves that there are hosts and servers as if we're an FPS, despite the fact that we are indeed a deterministic p2p game.

So I'm choosing to pass on all future network related threads.

If people want to learn how the game works they can search my post history on the subject matter.