America's Army Forums
http://archive2.forum.americasarmy.com/

Net-whatever
http://archive2.forum.americasarmy.com/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=13581
Page 1 of 19

Author:  dgodfather [ Tue Jun 03, 2014 12:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Net-whatever

BF is implementing some interesting net design concepts - http://blogs.battlefield.com/2014/06/ne ... 1813540320

Quote:
High Frequency Network Update

For the PC, PS4, and Xbox One platforms, we are adding something we nicknamed the “High Frequency Bubble”.

Within a certain radius of the player, we add the possibility to update the clients at a higher rate from the server. What this essentially means is that the server will update the client on what is happening more often than before. This normally results in a smoother, more “correct” player experience.

The High Frequency Update is by default turned OFF in this release. You will have to enable this setting to take advantage of the improved networking. To support players with a limited bandwidth connection, we support three different levels: LOW, MEDIUM and HIGH. Most players with a connection faster than 1Mbit should be fine using the HIGH setting. If you experience any issues, lower or turn off the setting completely.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MooojiuDRgw#t=68

We/someone needs to put together some testing experiments like this for AAPG.

Author:  Frigid [ Tue Jun 03, 2014 1:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Net-whatever

dgodfather wrote:
BF is implementing some interesting net design concepts - http://blogs.battlefield.com/2014/06/ne ... 1813540320

Quote:
High Frequency Network Update

For the PC, PS4, and Xbox One platforms, we are adding something we nicknamed the “High Frequency Bubble”.

Within a certain radius of the player, we add the possibility to update the clients at a higher rate from the server. What this essentially means is that the server will update the client on what is happening more often than before. This normally results in a smoother, more “correct” player experience.

The High Frequency Update is by default turned OFF in this release. You will have to enable this setting to take advantage of the improved networking. To support players with a limited bandwidth connection, we support three different levels: LOW, MEDIUM and HIGH. Most players with a connection faster than 1Mbit should be fine using the HIGH setting. If you experience any issues, lower or turn off the setting completely.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MooojiuDRgw#t=68

We/someone needs to put together some testing experiments like this for AAPG.

Yes, that would be awesome for AA:PG. And they should do the same tests as well.

Author:  ster!nn [ Tue Jun 03, 2014 1:25 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Net-whatever

Suggesting something as blasphemous as this in the AAPG forums will likely raise alarm bells. Prepare for the "we work on it in every patch,...speed of government," and "insert reasoning."

Performance metrics and values like this might be beyond the scope of what they're trying to accomplish at the moment. Atleast that's similar to what I've been directly told on this same matter.

Author:  .sauce [ Tue Jun 03, 2014 2:37 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Net-whatever

As far as netcode is concerned all BF4 is doing is scrambling to be not terrible. Even their high frequency network update is basically increasing the server tickrate from 10 to 30 within a certain radius of the client (i.e. the tickrate AAPG has ALL the time), and it took a development team the size of a small country 7 months to deliver that fix. I'm sure that increasing tickrate to 60 in PG would help, but I imagine that the consistency of the experience lies in the client/server relationship and not in how often the server is updating the client.

Unless I'm mistaken, increasing the server tickrate to 60 in PG simply requires more server resources. Writing code that gives each client a variable tickrate umbrella would be quite an undertaking and I genuinely don't think it would change the way the game feels.

My thoughts, at the least.

Author:  dgodfather [ Tue Jun 03, 2014 3:08 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Net-whatever

I'm not at all saying that what BF is doing is the way to do it. I've never played BF4.

I'm suggesting more apparent ways at looking at ways to solve network stability issues. Providing good feedback (community/dev) and looking at different testing procedures will improve the player experience. Publication of such experiments will help influence a better debugging technique.

Side note - Are you suggesting that the netcode written for AAPG is superior to that of BF4?

Author:  Don Quixote [ Tue Jun 03, 2014 3:25 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Net-whatever

The developer team (of this version) to make any change in the current network code, in first place they would have to accept that there are some issues with it. From their perspective there are no issues with network code. If from their perspective there no issues, what they are going to fix?
I've given up. Its a dead end.

Author:  BCPull [ Tue Jun 03, 2014 3:27 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Net-whatever

Saying the game's netcode is superior to a title with a tickrate of only 10Hz isn't a huge statement :)

BF4 also had a fun bug where grenades would bounce off of the air above incapped bodies. You would see the grenade sail away, but the game created the explosion based on where the grenade would bounce to if there were a person in the way. Oops -- you somehow just accidentally killed yourself with your own explosive!

I've run a server at tickrates of 60 and 90Hz. Player impression was that it played better, but:
- it was only 5v5 (server load concerns not fully addressed)
- everybody had low (<100ms) pings
- in some cases, people knew they were on an increased-tick server (placebo effect)


I suspect it's tough to quantify improvements in player perception of netcode. In BF4, one major thing is players reported far fewer trade-kills after the tickrate change, but the AAPG Devs handled that issue through (I'm assuming here) a server-side decision on whose bullets landed first. There are also now supposed to be fewer instances of getting killed after rounding a corner in BF4, but I've not really experienced that as a problem in AAPG.

That said, I completely agree with your sentiment that it'd be great to have a clear process for exploring ways to improve the network algorithms (particularly with regards to player perception).

Author:  JaK- [ Tue Jun 03, 2014 3:32 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Net-whatever

Don Quixote wrote:
The developer team (of this version) to make any change in the current network code, in first place they would have to accept that there are some issues with it. From their perspective there are no issues with network code. If from their perspective there no issues, what they are going to fix?
I've given up. Its a dead end.


You come off as a pretty bright person, but not as a psychic. You read the same forum and stuff as everyone else, no where did they state that the network code doesn't have issues still. Nor did they ever imply it. Enough of the hot air please, let's stick to facts and opinions.

Author:  Don Quixote [ Tue Jun 03, 2014 3:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Net-whatever

Can you be kind enough to point me the thread where this subject is being debated in serious way, considering the different alternatives to the current network code? One that has developers participation, obviously.
Maybe I am wrong or my search has failed, anyway your help would be highly appreciated.

Author:  ster!nn [ Tue Jun 03, 2014 3:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Net-whatever

According to my own research with about a half dozen private servers is that AAPG w/ an increased tickrate did perform marginally better in bullet registry. Most noticeable when engaging hits on multiple targets.

True there is some placebo effect but it isn't true to say there isn't a discernible difference.

A handful of competitive teams run their own modified 60 tic servers just for that reason, higher tic rate translates to better gameplay registry. But if overdone does come at the cost of server performance.

But mathematically speaking the higher the better, 128 tic is standard for comp in CS but I haven't found that AAPG is capable of stable and smooth performance beyond 60 tic, which is an industry standard of sorts. The game is just too hardware intensive beyond 60 that it starts to deteriorate.

but, hey leave it to those so determined to play a game that registers players killing each other simultaneously to find their own solutions and discover these things. It took MONTHS to receive a fix for that issue.

Page 1 of 19 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/