Cloud Update

[secretface]

4 hours ago, NinaRicci2011 said:

I am not 100 procent  Sure , 

when i play ww2 i have this terrible connextion not , sometimes i fall in bad lobby , mostely the lobby’s are fine in ww2 

in modern warfare its hole broken , i think sbmm destroy the connextions , u have more mixed lobby’s  

Maybe ww2 plays better becoz there are less people in the servers 

Infinity ward have everytime this horrible matchmakings whit sbmm , thats means al a big thing over sbmm ( more lag ) 

advance warfare was the same horrible matchmaking 

AW plays great for me now that its off the servers then again me and the other 15 people are all they have to match against each other. LOL

[secretface]

14 hours ago, Crysister said:

Agreed. Stop wasting time with settings. It's game mechanism. If you have played Fifa the last couple of years, you know there's scripting in the game, to help low skilled players not get played down.

Something like that it's in CoD MW, and its all from a marketings point of view.

They need to be sure to sell copies to all kind of players and keep them playing, to atract new players.

Thats why SBMM is important and latency is not.

Unistall if you can't the BS or play the BS and accept it the way it is.

DumaOS won't a different, but it does give you the features as it promise.

angry much? If its skill based then I should be playing with a bunch of people around my skill level? So they should all be as bad as me right? So if they gear it to help the sub par players like me then I should have no lag if you are correct. I am thinking its something else but all would be guesses if you don't have the code sooo.

[slickrick6922]

2 hours ago, secretface said:

angry much? If its skill based then I should be playing with a bunch of people around my skill level? So they should all be as bad as me right? So if they gear it to help the sub par players like me then I should have no lag if you are correct. I am thinking its something else but all would be guesses if you don't have the code sooo.

its got nothing to do with sbmm, its net-working. I play 1 game and drop 50+ kills in team death-match, everyone one in the lobby sames slow and behind.  the next game I dont have time to react when me and someone run into each other at a full sprint, me with a sub machine gun set up for quick draw and them with a 400ms ads time light machine gun. if you play battlefield 5 theirs net working numbers you can have on the screen,  one of them is basically the sync between the players. I'm pretty sure this is one of many of the problems.

[oRaGaMi]

On 11/25/2019 at 6:40 PM, secretface said:

So playing last night I had an 8ms ping ingame and it still played like trash. I think there is something wrong with the game right now. I am not sure if a cloud update would help it or not.

If you had 8ms in game chances are you were not on a dedicated server.

That's what battlenonse says in his video.

[secretface]

So with the settings I got from blackfirehawk, I didn't have much success with MW, I may have done something wrong too. I am still very thankful for your help! So last night I got frustrated AND went black to blops4 and went 22-5 then 30 -2. Now I am not that good but it felt good to not be lagging. But I think this is more proof something is just flat out wrong withMW to date.

[faulko]

1 hour ago, secretface said:

So with the settings I got from blackfirehawk, I didn't have much success with MW, I may have done something wrong too. I am still very thankful for your help! So last night I got frustrated AND went black to blops4 and went 22-5 then 30 -2. Now I am not that good but it felt good to not be lagging. But I think this is more proof something is just flat out wrong withMW to date.

Something definitely isnt right.

First game search yesterday and again today, searching for lobby 174ms.

[Netduma Fraser]

16 hours ago, faulko said:

Something definitely isnt right.

First game search yesterday and again today, searching for lobby 174ms.

Have you checked to see that you didn't have local congestion? I can't think why it would try to find a game that high otherwise unless you were blocking Aus servers.

[faulko]

13 hours ago, Netduma Fraser said:

Have you checked to see that you didn't have local congestion? I can't think why it would try to find a game that high otherwise unless you were blocking Aus servers.

I have no idea why.

 

I don’t block anything.

 

sometimes a Duma reboot helps sometimes it doesn’t.

 

sometimes I find a 5-6ms lobby sometimes it’s 160ms+, even had a 380-400ms lobby once.
 

How the game even allows that is beyond me.

 

Not like it starts at 15ms and builds up, its just straight 174ms. I only get 3 numbers, 15ms, 108ms and 174ms.

 

i did try the latest firmware but it’s so slow and doesnt load pages I went back to a .40 firmware.

 

if I had to guess and that’s all it is,  I’d say if you have cross play off then psn uses their servers, Xbox use their own and same as pc, but if you enable cross play then god knows what happens, likely uses blizzard servers in god knows what country, because sure as shit isn’t ping first.

[Netduma Fraser]

Have you double checked through PingPlotter or standard ping that local congestion isn't happening? Are you saying this is only an issue when crossplay is enabled? - Have you confirmed this?

[faulko]

Definitely not local congestion that i can see.

Happens with crossplay on or off.

Just hoped on and i will see what the first search is today.

[faulko]

First game of the day.
 

 1  be10-546.bng1.vdc01.syd.aussiebb.net (119.18.32.152)  11.005 ms  8.784 ms  4.529 ms
 2  HundredGigE0-0-0-8.core1.vdc01.syd.aussiebb.net (180.150.1.184)  1.949 ms  1.212 ms  1.747 ms
 3  HundredGigE0-0-0-8.core1.vdc01.syd.aussiebb.net (180.150.1.184)  0.601 ms  0.568 ms  0.422 ms
 4  as55497.nsw.ix.asn.au (218.100.52.65)  1.045 ms  1.134 ms  1.118 ms
 5  137.221.85.35 (137.221.85.35)  246.675 ms  167.335 ms  164.084 ms
 6  ge-0-0-5-br02-eqty2.as57976.net (137.221.65.120)  164.265 ms  164.280 ms  164.241 ms
 7  xe-0-0-0-0-br02-lgpy1.as57976.net (137.221.65.65)  165.116 ms  165.257 ms  165.772 ms
 8  et-0-0-67-pe1-lgpy1.as57976.net.84.221.137.in-addr.arpa (137.221.84.71)  204.492 ms  164.363 ms  165.170 ms
 9  icn-lgpy1-ia-bons-01.as57976.net (137.221.66.97)  164.429 ms
icn-lgpy1-ia-bons-02.as57976.net (137.221.66.99)  165.134 ms
icn-lgpy1-ia-bons-01.as57976.net (137.221.66.97)  164.430 ms
10  117.52.161.198 (117.52.161.198)  164.587 ms
117.52.161.214 (117.52.161.214)  164.084 ms  164.265 ms
11  103.198.33.203 (103.198.33.203)  164.370 ms  164.397 ms  164.370 ms

 

 

[faulko]

[Bat 'n' Ball]

Good morning,

It's been over a month since COD MW was released and there doesn't seem to be any change to the cloud as far as an update is concerned. I still have misplaced servers, dedicated servers showing as peer servers etc. I have reported a few via the mis located server form.

While I’m on the subject, isn’t there a more elegant solution to this problem rather than relying on users having to report server inaccuracies?

Servers with the domain names vultr.com, choopa.net, gameservers.com and amazonaws.com are four I have come across which seem to be dedicated servers being hosted from professional data centers. Can’t the cloud updates be tuned in some way to automatically identify a dedicated server by means domain name filtering?

[Corbula]

As it stands at the moment I can't see it making a huge difference as the performance of the game for me is quite poor. I'm having a horrible time since launch. I've yet to find a server that plays well for me. 

[Bat 'n' Ball]

14 hours ago, Corbula said:

As it stands at the moment I can't see it making a huge difference as the performance of the game for me is quite poor. I'm having a horrible time since launch. I've yet to find a server that plays well for me. 

The net-code/lag-comp in MW is broken in my opinion. You can have the best connection in the world and still have an infuriating online gaming experience.

But the Geo-Filter is a selling feature of these routers. It is not working in MW at the moment, with little mention of updates or when it will be fixed.

[Netduma Alex]

On 12/7/2019 at 6:32 AM, Bat 'n' Ball said:

While I’m on the subject, isn’t there a more elegant solution to this problem rather than relying on users having to report server inaccuracies?

Servers with the domain names vultr.com, choopa.net, gameservers.com and amazonaws.com are four I have come across which seem to be dedicated servers being hosted from professional data centers. Can’t the cloud updates be tuned in some way to automatically identify a dedicated server by domain name filtering?

We already have systems like that in place. IP addresses and domain names are used to figure out what kind of server something is.

The mislocated servers thing is certainly an issue. The Geo-Filter database is automatically updated from various repositories of server locations, but when those fail, we have to go in manually and move servers around. Given enough time, server locations usually get corrected by themselves, but we do it manually when needed.

In the future i'd like to see either an integrated reporting feature in DumaOS, or perhaps the ability to move servers around locally, so that users could fix problems for themselves.

Unfortunately right now, these things must be done manually. We do cloud updates every two weeks or so, which means that things are always being updated, but sometimes it takes a while to catch a mislocated server.

[Grafti]

2 hours ago, Netduma Alex said:

We already have systems like that in place. IP addresses and domain names are used to figure out what kind of server something is.

The mislocated servers thing is certainly an issue. The Geo-Filter database is automatically updated from various repositories of server locations, but when those fail, we have to go in manually and move servers around. Given enough time, server locations usually get corrected by themselves, but we do it manually when needed.

In the future i'd like to see either an integrated reporting feature in DumaOS, or perhaps the ability to move servers around locally, so that users could fix problems for themselves.

Unfortunately right now, these things must be done manually. We do cloud updates every two weeks or so, which means that things are always being updated, but sometimes it takes a while to catch a mislocated server.

I suggested Fraser a few days ago add a feature in netduma in wich you can choose a range of ms in ping assist to find lobbies. That's becouse I found that due to lag-compensation (I guess) the best games have a ping to the server between 50-60ms. So the problem is that with geophilter I can avoid all lobbies above this range, but not the ones wich are under. So indicating a minimmum ping to geophilter would be a great idea.

[Zennon]

9 minutes ago, Grafti said:

I suggested Fraser a few days ago add a feature in netduma in wich you can choose a range of ms in ping assist to find lobbies. That's becouse I found that due to lag-compensation (I guess) the best games have a ping to the server between 50-60ms. So the problem is that with geophilter I can avoid all lobbies above this range, but not the ones wich are under. So indicating a minimmum ping to geophilter would be a great idea.

I asked for this a good while back, hopefully if more people ask we may see it.

[wizrdburialgrnd]

2 hours ago, Zennon said:

I asked for this a good while back, hopefully if more people ask we may see it.

Just in the spirit of testing this is kind of a no-brainer. You've got my vote.

[Netduma Alex]

18 hours ago, Grafti said:

I suggested Fraser a few days ago add a feature in netduma in wich you can choose a range of ms in ping assist to find lobbies. That's becouse I found that due to lag-compensation (I guess) the best games have a ping to the server between 50-60ms. So the problem is that with geophilter I can avoid all lobbies above this range, but not the ones wich are under. So indicating a minimmum ping to geophilter would be a great idea.

So you want Ping Assist to work with a minimum as well as a maximum?

In theory this seems counter productive but given the lag compensation argument, I can see why you'd want it.

Not sure if it's worth putting the development time into but maybe.

[Zennon]

32 minutes ago, Netduma Alex said:

Not sure if it's worth putting the development time into but maybe.

I am happy on the London server but I can see the use for people who like a certain server say a US user that can pick 40-50 so they get the bank they like even if the cloud is not up to date as circling said bank could lead to misallocated servers being allowed.

I think it should have been put into development a long time ago with more of my ideas

[Netduma Alex]

2 hours ago, Zennon said:

I am happy on the London server but I can see the use for people who like a certain server say a US user that can pick 40-50 so they get the bank they like even if the cloud is not up to date as circling said bank could lead to misallocated servers being allowed.

I think it should have been put into development a long time ago with more of my ideas

Setting a minimum ping just seems kind of weird to me. I understand why it's useful in this situation but it's going to be hard to explain to people that don't know what lag compensation is.

Essentially I imagine it like setting a donut around your house instead of a radius, and you can adjust the width of the donut... That was a weird analogy...

BUT the donut is ping based rather than distance based, which is less likely to go wrong because of mislocated stuff.

[Zennon]

Misallocation is location based not ping based misallocated servers are showing the wrong location not the wrong ping.

This is not to cheat lag comp, it is for people who like a server bank that has less packet loss etc.

So if the cloud is not up to date and this is happening right now for MW and happened during the life cycle of Blops4.

It bares no difference to me if it is implemented or not but to US users I think it would help a great deal.

[Netduma Alex]

Yeah I can see how this might be a useful stopgap for when the cloud isn't working.

Might be the kind of thing you have to enable from an advanced settings menu or something. Basically so it's there as a tech support option.

[Grafti]

1 hour ago, Netduma Alex said:

it's going to be hard to explain to people that don't know what lag compensation is.

Easy:

"Lag compensation is artificial lag that some games add to better connections on purpose to make a more balanced experience to everyone and avoiding the best connected players to have a huge advantage over poor connection players. But in some games (CoD) this issue is broken and best connections are severaly punished"

Anyway, thank you for your consideration   

Hope to see this feature in the future