Suggestions!! I need your help

[Glazeko]

Guys I'm really having a struggle here. I don't know it it's my Internet in general but for some reason. I can never get settings to work correctly for at least 2 days. I'm not a network Guru but for some reason pre-emptive gives me better hit detection in cod yet I get more jitter and packet loss no matter if I'm on hyper traffic or any settings with the sliders. In reactive everything works best at 70/70 but it feels like I'm behind and hit detection feels wonky but I don't have any packet loss. I know all of this thanks to ping plotter. And no I am not playing infinite warfare I gave up a month ago. I play bo3 and titanfall 2. And also does everyone use hyper traffic. I don't see any improvements with that anyways.

[PharmDawgg]

Provide us a little more information if possible. Like what your general setup is and are you on cable or dsl internet? Do you game on PS4, Xbox or PC? All these do make a difference.

Hyper traffic seems to work best for me when the R1 is my primary router and if I have quite a few devices on my network. I tend to see more of a difference in that situation.

[Glazeko]

I have cable Internet with spectrum the modem I have is a technicolor tc8715d. The modem is in bridge mode and the netduma is the primary router. I have a ps4 and only the ps4 is wired. The rest of the 6 devices connected are wireless. My spectrum in my area provides 100 down and 25 up but the download is never reaching 100 mps is always around the 80s or 90s but upload is always consistent

[ColonicBoom]

for some reason pre-emptive gives me better hit detection in cod yet I get more jitter and packet loss no matter if I'm on hyper traffic or any settings with the sliders. In reactive everything works best at 70/70 but it feels like I'm behind and hit detection feels wonky but I don't have any packet loss. I know all of this thanks to ping plotter. And also does everyone use hyper traffic. I don't see any improvements with that anyways.

 

I haven't compared hit-detection when using pre-emptive and reactive. Personally I would only base my decision on the results from tests where I can see the data (like ping plotter). I think that over a session of fast-paced gaming, with all the variables that are constantly changing, it's too difficult (impossible even) to accurately or objectively test anything like hit-detection.

But if you feel it's an obvious difference then you should just go with the one that you feel is best. Your own opinion on it is all that really matters after all.

 

 

Hyperlane is all about prioritising your gaming data over other devices on your own network.

If your console is NOT in hyperlane, while other people in your house are browsing online or watching youtube, then all data will have equal priority on the network.

If there is no other data flying about on your network then it's not a problem. But if there is other data then you can think of it like traffic at a junction. Hyperlane let's your game data go straight through without waiting for the other traffic.

 

If I'm gaming then I always use hyperlane. But if I'm downloading an update to my xbox then I disable it because it can get bogged down with a large amount of data.

[PharmDawgg]

I trust what this guy says. He knows what he is talking about

Check out this vid for suggestions https://youtu.be/NpxtLgirlbU

[Glazeko]

I have seen many videos and have tried settings. Pre-emptive gives me the best results in game the thing is that if my sister start watching Netflix and other people hop on the wifi. I start getting high ping spikes and packet loss, even if i use hyper lane i feel the lag in the game because im the one lagging. I have tested this for weeks. Fraser in one post told me that reactive would be the better choice based on the ping plotter results. Yet in games I feel like I'm behind in bo3 and titanfall 2. Also in dlsreports I never get the same result. Is never consistent with the pings but I always get an A+ on all the categories.

 

Oh and also I have a problem with the netduma connection diagnostics not working. I have factory reset multiple times and that section never works. I have even let it run for 30 minutes and it never finishes. I usually have to reset the modem for my Internet to work because it gets stuck doing the diagnostic.

[Netduma Fraser]

If you're getting lag using congestion control then it doesn't sound like ALL devices in the house are connected to the Netduma. What is the average you get to the game as shown by the Geo-filter?

 

Are you using Google Chrome? It disconnects all devices from the internet, if you computer doesn't automatically reconnect then it could appear to be going on forever.

[Glazeko]

All devices are connected to the netDuma. I usually average 17 ping in the Miami servers for bo3. And I do use chrome but the diagnostic page doesn't work properly any more. I don't know if the problem might be my Internet providers modem causing the issues I have. My Internet provider is spectrum and the modem is the technicolor tc8715d I don't know if the modem is bad or not but is on bridge mode with wifi turned off.

[Netduma Fraser]

Perhaps there is something up stream blocking the ping. Do you have stealth mode enabled in miscellaneous settings enabled on the R1 by any chance?

[Glazeko]

No I do not. And I also have another question. Is it true that hyper traffic increases your ping by 10Ms or so? I heard this on a video from battle nonsense and I want to know if is true.

[Netduma Fraser]

No I do not. And I also have another question. Is it true that hyper traffic increases your ping by 10Ms or so? I heard this on a video from battle nonsense and I want to know if is true.

 

No, I don't believe he had it completely set up correctly for his test. Hyper traffic puts your game ping at the front of the queue so that jitter/spikes are minimal.

[Glazeko]

So even if you're not using congestion control hyper traffic still makes your jitter and lag spikes minimal?

[Netduma Fraser]

So even if you're not using congestion control hyper traffic still makes your jitter and lag spikes minimal?

 

It will still put your gaming packets ahead of the queue yes but would definitely recommend both hyper traffic and anti-flood combined for the best experience 

[ColonicBoom]

Pre-emptive gives me the best results in game the thing is that if my sister start watching Netflix and other people hop on the wifi. I start getting high ping spikes and packet loss, even if i use hyper lane i feel the lag in the game because im the one lagging.

 

Also in dlsreports I never get the same result.

 

Oh and also I have a problem with the netduma connection diagnostics not working. I have even let it run for 30 minutes and it never finishes.

 

That would suggest that they are getting around the anti-flood, are you certain that they aren't able to connect to the isp hub?

What do you have the anti-flood set at? (the % sliders)

 

I don't even bother with dsl reports anymore, I think it's of little use for testing your connection for gaming.

It used to tell me my connection with my previous isp was perfect, A+ / A+ / A+ even when my Anti-Flood was set at 100/100, but in BO3 I was lagging all over the place, teleporting backwards, rubber bullets, etc.

 

When the Diagnostics starts to run, it shuts everything out of the network and your laptop will look a network to connect to. If there's another network available, it will join it and then the Diagnostic will seem to never finish. That's why I'm wondering if your isp hub is still accepting connections 'around' the Netduma.

Does this never-ending Diagnostic check happen when your laptop is connected to the Netduma over ethernet?

 

 

Is it true that hyper traffic increases your ping by 10Ms or so? I heard this on a video from battle nonsense and I want to know if is true.

 

He's probably looking at the in-game ping which is usually a bit higher. The ping from the Netduma Geo Filter is just a ping. But the in-game graph in BO3 is higher, it adds a little processing / turn-around time for the data (or maybe it's just conservative).

[Glazeko]

Everything is on my room there is no way anyone is connected to the isp hub. All I run Is 70/70 for cc since it gives me the most stable ping stats when the network is getting hammered. I did testing for days with ping plotter, yet I don't know if is just cod that gives me an advantage for lagging while playing in preemptive which is the worst for my connection with the high jitter, packet loss, and ping spikes.

[Netduma Fraser]

Please provide the screenshots asked for here: http://support.netduma.com/support/solutions/articles/16000022425-lag-support-instructions-to-post-on-the-forum-and we can advise further.

[RL317]

Guys I'm really having a struggle here. I don't know it it's my Internet in general but for some reason. I can never get settings to work correctly for at least 2 days. I'm not a network Guru but for some reason pre-emptive gives me better hit detection in cod yet I get more jitter and packet loss no matter if I'm on hyper traffic or any settings with the sliders. In reactive everything works best at 70/70 but it feels like I'm behind and hit detection feels wonky but I don't have any packet loss. I know all of this thanks to ping plotter. And no I am not playing infinite warfare I gave up a month ago. I play bo3 and titanfall 2. And also does everyone use hyper traffic. I don't see any improvements with that anyways.

I've found that using the absolute best settings for my setup and playing on my local server only gives me the worst experience. I used Pro Innocence's settings as a base (interesting to hear that having cookies enabled supposedly increases jitter, haven't noticed the same but I try to keep the same base of settings while changing one variable at a time for testing), but switching preemptive to reactive or vice versa doesn't seem to make a difference. The main difference seems to come from changing servers.

 

Getting 6.5-7ms to the UK server, with my console (or port UDP 3074) in hyper lane with 70/70 reactive is awful, as I'm constantly behind the action, aim assist is wonky etc. No time to react against hexagon turds on WiFi and laggy TVs. Playing on servers further out is better overall but not totally consistent.

 

I got bored of IW's fake two bar feel last night so I tried a game of BO3 for the first time since October, and it was strange to see servers are still up. Got 7ms to the UK and got melted lmao. Before that, on IW, I only found two smooth games and the sad part is in the first good game I was trolling using no Kontrol Freeks (on 20 sens LOL), and in the second I joined a game late and nuked three angry tryhards. In the game after my first smooth game these guys start melting; I was 0-8 in gunfights against a guy going negative, yet I was leading my team. This guy was using the R3kt with high damage, but an awful fire rate so it was at the disadvantage because he was missing shots... and yet I'd die before getting a second or third hitmarker with a KBAR in close quarters. My aim assist was also often stuck off to the side of his player model. In the game immediately after my second good game (I think they were about two hours apart zzzz), I suddenly start getting pumped by these guys who went like 7 times negative the game before, after two of the tryhards ragequit and one ended up on my team. I was using a quickdraw Mauler, which kills quicker than a KBAR, in close quarters on Frontier, and I was being insta-deleted by Type 2s and NV4s with no quickdraw on and circle drawing aim haha.

 

Most of my best games have been on the Polish or New Jersey, US servers lately, at 40ms and 74ms respectively, in the past couple of weeks. At 7ms I've never felt like more of a slow, inaccurate deer in headlights.

 

The only thing I can think of is that the game's poor, wonky update rates are giving higher latency players a chance to get ahead of where I see them in as close to real time as possible, because who gets under half a frame of latency to a server and then complains in 90% of games? Because I'm constantly rushing maybe a slightly higher latency is advantageous (it's a basic rule in game networking, if you round a corner and bump into someone who is stationary, you'll have a window to take him out before he sees you), but there is NOTHING better about hit reg on <7ms. If anything it just helps my enemies because I can round a corner but they'll see me instantly lol. Must be nice playing against me with my super stable connection and properly aligned hit box and aim assist; how considerate of me

[progprogprog]

Don't know why but port forwarding and turning off IPv6 in Lan and Wan has made a hugh difference to the game for me.i also agree that playing on the closest server in IW is not always best.

 

Sure the hit detection is better but the game feels way to fast.i have been doing a lot of experimenting recently and find if you have players in a lobby with very similar ping to you the game play is not great.

What I try to do is force the French server as ping to that one seems to feel much more balanced

[Glazeko]

I mean I gave up on IW could care less. And I knew already about player in oversea servers. I really don't know if the problem is with my modem tho. All I do is play search and destroy on bo3. I don't mess with port forward because I already get a open nat type in all cods I have.

[Netduma Fraser]

I mean I gave up on IW could care less. And I knew already about player in oversea servers. I really don't know if the problem is with my modem tho. All I do is play search and destroy on bo3. I don't mess with port forward because I already get a open nat type in all cods I have.

Please provide the screenshots asked for here: http://support.netduma.com/support/solutions/articles/16000022425-lag-support-instructions-to-post-on-the-forum-and we can advise further.

 

^ and can advise further.