Was just in a game of 40-person Operations and the Extr Offset hit something like 137! It was like playing with severe input lag on your mouse (if you know what that’s like), only I’m on PS4 so it affected responsiveness of my character on controller. Rubber banding enemies, getting shot behind cover, collecting damage even. Really bad this afternoon.
I don’t think it’s a case of low pingers needing to accept a compromise. Optimise the game for the most common use case, which is low to medium ping. Since your net code knows when it encounters a high pinger tell them in game that they are experiencing high latency with messages on screen that they can’t ignore (rather than putting icons on the right hand side of the screen). Tell them they will suffer a degraded game performance. They can’t (legitimately) come on the forum raging about the game then.
Let them connect and play, if that keeps you inline with PSN and Live guidelines, but make it clear that the game will not always work as intended.
The Extr Offset means how many ms players are ahead of you, but over 50ms makes you lag behind server. Offset is client side, not server or game side and thats why you see high offset when you are in deploy screen..
That was the server offset, present in bf4 and bfhl. And that only told you how far you were behind the server, not specifically other players.
The extrapolation offset is something else, it was first seen at bf1 launch. Wasn’t included in either alpha/beta. Its the value used for player movement extrapolation as I understand it.
I have a new 43" uhd Samsung TV and although not as quick as a gaming monitor it has one of the lowest input latencies of current tv’s less than 18 ms and before you all say that’s the issue I would imagine most players with an xbox will be using a TV. My xbox is wired aswell.
Xbox detailed network statistics latency 30.01mbps d/l 5.84mbps u/l 155ms latency 0 packet loss mtu 1452
So having the network performance indicator running, here are the average stats
US East Server
Latency 87.7ms
Extra Offset 39.0ms
24 Kills 11 Deaths
US West Server
Latency 149.7ms
Extra Offset 34.2ms
19 Kills 7 Deaths
Quickmatch Server
Latency 49.2ms
Extra Offset 35.2ms
13 Kills 8 Deaths
I think until its fixed US servers for UK players is the way to go the gameplay feels so much better when you can actually run around like a loon and win gunfights! Not having to sneak around and pre -aming on every corner with your lmg when your on a european server trying not to get one shoted by a pistol from the other side of the map! Although the kd ratios on the games I played are not hugely different, I was playing domination, the actual gameplay on the US servers was far more enjoyable, I was able to run around capturing flags all gun-ho!
Exactly, you’re testing your speed to the nearest server to you. Not the BF server nor the same path you would take to the server. Not to mention not the same size of data, or accounting for ISPs putting speed test traffic as a priority to “boost” their values.
Holy crap! This sounds like progress in the right direction. Thanks for keeping us informed.
As i said previously, i dont think anyone is looking for an advantage over high ping players, just not to be put at a disadvantage even if it is unintentional, personally when i had crappy internet i didnt play FPS online because i expected to have a a bad experience, now i do have a good connection and still having a sub-par experience.
Looking forward to these changes being implemented.
My Netstats are almost identical to yours and i am also having the exact same issues as you posted. Have been ini the progress of getting some vids edited together.
My favourite from mine is the A-10 center mass shot registers as a headshot for +8 damage.
I dont know what the heck you have for Internet providers in USA.
But in the rest of the world speed test. Tptest. Bredbandskollen. Etc.. Seems to give about the same stats as the netgraph. That is if you choose to test to a server in a location of the bf1 servers.
Dutch. Okey. Test every available place for speedtest in Dutch.
Irland. Do the same. Test both sides of the country and the midle.
South American. Testing different locations from Sweden to random places in South America… Guess what? It gives a value about the same as the netgraph in bf1!
I don’t know why you and mrmarckwell is always so condescending against other forum wisitors?
Surely people do understand that they have to test there ping to the location where the servers are at!?
Maybe you could explain to @mischkag why and how the netcode sucks.. So he can fix it?
regarding the issue with players delivering damage ahead of their visible player model,I can say I was experiencing this matter “live” to say so back in the days when they tested
the server frame time in BF4CTE. I was playing CTE a lot that time to help with some feedback.What Dice did then ,was to set some servers with different lag comp.and see what people experience with them…so,on the servers that worked excellent for some players (including me) most of the players complained that they are having a bad experience(i guess those were the players with high ping,packet loss..etc. usually with crappy connections) i was having a 200Mbit down-6Mbit up fiber connection that time with no issues
So they set the servers that way .since that day I’m experiencing the things you wrote in here…i play only in EU servers and tried the games on multiple ISP’s in my country(Romania) with speeds up to 1Gbit/sec down and 500Mbit/sec up ,FTTH connection and the experience is the same mostly pings around 25-50 ms,no packet loss or other issues…traced the connections to the servers an there were no pocket loss thru the hops…In many cases I can’t even react to the player is shooting at me when he comes from around a corner because he seems that he had already shot at me before I can see his model also since then when I’m in a close range gun fight the game behaves like the server is putting my actions away and i have to wait for the other player to finish me, to say it in a simple way and that has only mostly to do with the game lag compensation and with BF1 Dice increased that from 250 or something ms to above 300ms… I hope Dice will take this in consideration in the upcoming patches because there are lots of players who really love this francise and the experience should be enjoyable and the same for all players.
Most people don’t know how to set a new location in speed test they just run it amd it will go to the nearest server. But you already know, just won’t post it, that all your speed test in different areas have different speeds some will be much slower than others and only be maybe 10 miles away. That’s because of the routes, their traffic, and their over all equipment. And that’s where you will get issues and inconsistentcies.
The Web is the wild wild west. Just cause you pay for 100Mbps fiber channel doesn’t mean that’s you gave good stable internet. Jitter, your ISP, and other ISPs crappy pipe that you are routed through can effect your gameplay.
Those servers are not dice bf1 servers. There could be issues with the connection to dice servers that are not shown by connecting to ping test servers.
Many assume a low ping in a ping test should automatically earn them an equally low ping on game servers.
Ping testing does not share the same packet length, resulting in potentially smoother transmission through bad routes.
A ping test might accurately depict your connection state to bf1 servers, but on the flip side, it might not.
Well @mischkag said they are looking into all of these concerns. I feel like they will eventually get it all sorted out. Maybe we will see some improvements on the upcoming update!
Personally, I fell like there should be matchmaking options in place so that when a player uses quick match they can choose to say hey, don’t put me in a server with someone who has a high ping or low throughput and they get thrown into a server that has flags for such with active countermeasures to block players who violate those settings at anytime during the game, sort of like the low-ping servers of CoD 4 and [email protected] after they could no longer disable the sv_antilag variable due to patching. Let’s be honest here, high ping isn’t the only thing that can cause issues, in fact, for me the biggest issues arise from players who clearly have synching issues due to unstable traffic flow, whether actual or artificial-this is a phenomenon I see in many multiplayer games. Situations where players are teleporting, flickering and absorbing large amounts of damage while dealing burst damage and yet their overall ping is less than 150ms, I’ve often seen players teleport in games reporting as little as 30ms jitter and sub 100ms ping at the highest points and they are clearly benefitting from this (titanfall 1 and Black Ops 2 on PC).
That way, all of the players who legitimately have crappy isps, which they shouldn’t be playing competitively on in my opinion-another debate for another time, can then play on their pick of regions, just noting that they will be on an even footing with everyone else in that server. Meanwhile, legit players who pay for decent internet can have a more equitable and trustworthy experience.
I say this because region locks aren’t going to fix a lot of the issues that I see in multiplayer gaming in general with regard to connectivity and traffic flow. All a region block does is block a player based off of either account criteria, which can easily be bypassed or by Wan IPs, which again can be bypassed by proxies. Ultimately, even if I am in a situation where I am only playing against other people in North America, it still means high ping players and/or unstable traffic flow. I know this because players from Mexico often will read four stable green bars in CoD (I live in Texas) and they still teleport, appear out of thin air and do burst damage. I bet if I got a numeric readout there would be a noticeable ping jitter but their overall ping would still be less than 100ms and they would still give me fits as they do in BF1. No-region locks won’t fix that issue at all.