- last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT
300ms is low latency? wow. i average 22ms to most EU servers in most games.
22ms on HPC? Is HPC included when you ever so casually say "most games"? If so, I find that hard to believe.
I live in the US, and it's slightly larger than the UK (and it doesn't have a nice fiber-optic network). Add that to Hurricane Katrina, and I don't have any servers anywhere near me. Most players that I see on HPC hold between 100 and 200ms, so I think 300 ms using dialup is right fine on HPC, considering all this.
Oh, by the way - I'd love to see a screenshot of you playing HPC with a 22ms ping. It would.... Inspire me (LAN games need not apply).
He shouldn't be embarassed, it's your fault he's losing. You are running at 56k, which means you are VERY limited to the number of packets you can send and recieve per second. This, in simple terms, means your hit detection is utter -blam!-e, you can hit other people quite easily, but they can't hit you because you're not in sync with the server. This is exploited in CS:S with something called "Rate hacking", where you limit the number of packets you can send and recieve per second to a number around 10, this does 2 things, first, it makes it look like your ping is 5ms and second, it makes you nearly impossible to hit, while having no impact on your ability to hti others.
No, not really. Gearbox did the port to include 56k support, I'm simply playing the game. If that causes runtime errors, is it my fault? Should you be held accountable for every blue screen of death windows gives you? Where's the logic?
I don't find it easier to hit people on 56k at all - in fact, I find it harder.
I know what packets are. I also realize that you wave your hand and use big words so I won't notice that you give no direct cause to claim my hit detection is crap. By your own explanation (later on in your 'post'), hit detection is done server-side, so it only matters where I am in the mind of the server, yes? So if I'm consistently 1/3 of a second behind, then the server actually has a pretty good picture of me - it's just a little behind. Kind of like how the elevator doesn't exert a force on you once it starts moving. If somebody shoots at me - they shoot at where the server tells them I am and the server decides whether I live or die by where the server thinks I am, as well. It doesn't matter where I am on my screen.
We're talking about HPC, not CS:S so stop equivocating and make a genuine arguement. Unless they were made on the same engine..............
Nobody appears to warp on your screen. This is, as i have already explained, due to H1PC's crappy netcode and your limited number of packets a second. You're probably all over the place on their screens, especially as your ping is 300ms.
You're right. Nobody warps on my screen. Oh wait - that's right except me. If the server warps me, it has the ultimate effect of making the game choppy - you knw - one of those things you tend to notice when you're used to a nice 30 fps. That doesn't usually happen to me. When it starts, I usually have about five seconds before I lose my connection to the server. And it usually doesn't happen until my ping gets much higher than 300ms.
When i said graphically intensive, i was referring to the constant action and the large number of objects on the maps, every one of which has to be tracked by the server. Then you have to factor in hitboxes and bullets, a RTS game for hit detection will just go "is it in range?""yes""firing""damage=2d6 " or whatever (obviously not in english) whereas a FPS has to submit the fact that you are firing, the server has to register that fact, then using it's current record of your position and camera, work out the vector of the bullet, factoring in its speed, then check if there are any hitboxes along that vector at the time it would be there, then if there are, it has to calculate the damage done, then send all that information to all the clients involved. Trust me on this one, FPSs use tonnes more bandwidth than anything else.
This is also why 56kers lag, as i said before, they can't send as many packets per second which means the server doesn't have an accurate knowledge of their position so when the person with an accurate view tries to fire, the server is still showing you as 1/3 of a second behind where you were, so you don't get hit.
Then maybe you shouldn't have referred to graphics because nothing in that paragraph of explanation says anything about graphics, much less intensive ones. It simply describes what the server has to keep track of - which was my point - graphics mean nothing - only what the server has to keep track of, which I will reiterate does not include graphics.
H2PC uses Havok? How did you figure that out? How could it use a 32-bit engine that doesn't support multi-threading if those are the primary reasons that the game is being made for Vista in the first place?
So basically: what you said contradicted itself. It does work for me - In spite of the contradictory quasi-theoretical herrings, it somehow, magically works for me and doesn't bother other players.
How would I know? I join each game and say, "I'm on 56k - lemme know if you guys lag any more than usual and I'll find another game."
Basically, the netcode needs to be massively improved otherwise anyone below 512kbps will not have a chance in hell of getting a decent game in.
Really? I played perfectly fine on DSL Lite (256k) before my hometown was destroyed. Maybe you should leave chance and probability calculations to somebody who's more qualified. (btw, I'm a biostatistican.)
Being fifteen and paying for your own stuff yourself doesn't make you a genius. You were wrong about ISDN speeds and its availability. You were wrong about 56k never having been for gaming (now you say it's only good for basic rts and text based stuff - would you care to change your mind without actually admitting you were mistaken again?)
Oh, you should be happy, because I'm actually obeying your omniscient commands and 'logic'. I don't think it works, I know.
Maybe not as well as it works for you, but it still works.
[Edited on 2/17/2006]