I am in the SA area FYI...Just went coo coo today. Checked 3 servers, odd thing is SA  server showing high Ping of about 250,,,usually about 80 also with eratic PL..are they routing servers to other distant servers?

The US and EU which for me are usually high and this is normal from my location...I accept that....the main issue is the PL.

Is this a known issue for all...or is it just affecting a few? And from where 

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

..The cause of packet loss (and warps, which the gaijin servers are incredibly generous with allowing) is not necessarily distance (a SA client can get as low as 110ms to the UK backbone, an Oz client could get something like 180ms to the US westcoast..) - but number of hops (and variable routes).

 

As long as you have a stable stream, practically regardless of ping, the server will happily allow it.

 

So what happens to legit players is that as you send and fire updates, if you have a long enough route, is that there will be a large change in the route at some point. So the stream is interrupted, and the server will for example expect more information after a timeout (which is high, because of the way it's set up - it's not 250ms, it's much, much higher before the server actually starts dropping connections). And then once you reach the timeout, or are unable to recover the connection, the client will at some point try to connect again. And this rarely works (or the server just rejects the new connection), because that isn't the approach anyone is using with online games.

 

Instead, they just progressively increase the allowance on packet loss percentage, timeout length, and sometimes also reduce update frequency. The best (read: most ridiculous) one I saw was a server-side "fix" where they basically simulated updates for a client on the server (so you'd get some rudimentary AI movement instead of a freeze once the prediction algorithm ran out of intermediate points to adjust to). And then they'd "supply" that with client vs. client contests based on server event times.

 

And even that was experienced by users as more fair than when getting shafted by someone who would lag so much that they would basically shoot you long before they registered on the server in your fov, etc. Because then the laughable AI movement would at least let the opposing players see their target even when they basically disappeared off the server and jumped around the corners, etc.

 

Of course, in the end, the side-effect from this kind of thing - the second long pauses before the confirmed kills for the laggers - was complained about so much that the dev had to remove it again. Another attempt was made at funneling people in to sub 250ms servers. But that was complained about as well, so they simply gave up. And this (very popular) series of games has since been deployed without client filtering at all. In effect, you literally only get booted if you - for example because of progressively bad packet loss on account on living on Mars and insisting on having to play on Earth, or seconds worth of interruption on the wifi, etc. - lose your connection to the server, and then are unable to connect again at all.

 

Note btw. that statistically, the players that typically cause significant warps, or complain about "lags" and things like that - do not come from either Australia or South Africa. They come from the US of A. And they typically live far enough from the central fiber-highway that they basically have 20 hops to get to even a local server (this is more hops than someone from SA would have to get through Poland's notorious amount of copper-hops - it's more than you would have from the UK to China).

 

These players also have very low upload speeds. They.. also have certain issues with ISP subletting that is critical. They have traffic-shaping down the throat. And there's also the whole "jumbo packet" issue, that may or may not have something to do with foreign signals intelligence..

 

But these players are loud, they complain, and they want to get their money's worth for the product they bought. And so that's what the developers react to. By basically ruining the game not just for them, so they can connect and play interrupted, but also for literally everyone else.

 

Ironically, if the devs simply forced these players to fix their connections as much as possible, and then forced them to play on the local servers (or, say, a maximum of 250ms), then the issue would be resolved. And it frequently is during closed betas, as this type of filtering is both easy to implement, just as it will resolve 99% of the "visual lag" that players report.

 

But this is a solution that is not chosen when something is deployed for full release. Because one of these players will demand that they should be able to play with "their friends" that they've met on 4chan or some games forum or something. And then there suddenly isn't any server that can be reached between these two players where both of them are within about 250ms, and with less than 20 hops to ensure a reasonably stable stream.

 

And the "solution" chosen in the end is to remove basically all limitations. While support actually actively looks into "packet loss problems", where that literally does not occur until we're talking about a public wifi-point in a library, after the router's unisolated dsl-cable ran through 500km of marsh-land, and the ISP is traffic shaping every request that isn't streaming on a cable news channel into a secondary queue. At that point you register "packet loss" in the game, just as this is the conditions you would require before your average 50x50 phone-conversation actually drops and freezes while having latency so high it's genuinely noticeable. We're talking sattelite phone issues here, like talking to the ISS type issues - that's what we're actually referring to when the game reports significant and sustained packet loss.

 

Because these blips, these small and infrequent packet loss issues that SA players have - those are recoverable. The sustained issues are not - but the game allows it anyway.

 

P.s. Note that someone who wanted to can (and they do) exploit this, by creating duplicate packets or dummy packets to avoid reporting connection loss during an interrupt. Fixes that would simply make that type of cheat - just as the game-breaking lag problems - extinct, they exist, and they have been deployed in certain games before in beta-tests. But they are not deployed, due to the amount of trolling spam from players who require "that their game should just work".

 

But hey, whatever.

 

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that due to the ship update the game servers are overloaded , no one complained about such a problem in previous updates, suddenly hundreds of people have started to have a solution to this problem should be found immediately

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, there could be problems with server locations, there could be issues with remote service provider quality, and things of that sort. Sure.

 

But even if that was sorted out 100% optimally, in the sense that all players will have a Warthunder server within, say, 120ms - that's not going to change the fact that what "people" are demanding, is that they should be allowed to play on any server with magical mystery technology that removes "visual lag". These people will not stop complaining unless they are able to connect and play on their modem-connections, of course - but they will stop complaining about how the game is "broken", while ranting about it endlessly on every forum on the internet.

 

And that "problem" is not going to go away, even if Gaijin forced everyone to connect to the most local server, and booted everyone with packet loss and 180ms+ pings.

 

Even if the vast, vast majority of players would at that point be able to connect to the game just fine, and their games would be lag-free and without the infinitely warping crazies who ruin the game for everyone normally.

 

So I guess it's a cost/benefit scenario: you could allow in everyone without limits and get good press. Or you could actually make a good game that values gameplay and fairness, and get **** press. That's certainly what killed DICE as a separate studio, for example - EA required magical servers that break the laws of physics. And when DICE was unable to provide that, EA simply focused on good PR with people fascinated by xxxx instead.

 

Because that works. It always works. Certainly much better than a technically sound solution does.

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ARE YOU ALL CRAZY???

 

I play to disconnect from work, I'm not going trought all this technical stuff just to be able to play a game. 

I have never had to care about technical stuff with any game, and I am not starting now.

 

From 1.83 I'm lagging a lot, I mean A LOT, that is ping at 999, at random times, before 1.83 lag was a very rare thing, but now half of the time is UNPLAYABLE.

And I am doing nothing special to trigger it. When I play, I only do play, no chat, no google, nothing.

For me it is clear that is a Gaijin problem, but by now seems that they do nothing to solve it. 

And I am that kind of stupid people that thinks that devs and 3d artists have to eat also, so from time to time I spent some money on the game ( sure Gaijin can check it )

but from now on, until it clearly works fine again, I'm  going to spend NOT A SINGLE EURO MORE ON THIS GAME.

i7 4770, ssd disk, gtx 1060, 100 Mb/s fiber internet conecction ( actually around 70 Mb/s ). The rest of online games I play run fine, as always, SO IT IS NOT MY PROBLEM.

I will stop playing now, and see how it does in the next update.

Good bye and good luck.

  • Like 1
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could be you're connecting to a game server that's very far away from your location.

 

(tl;dr - aim for playing in your own region only - even though this doesn't actually guarantee you reasonable pings and distances either.)

 

It's not really your fault either, though, if that was the case. I mean, gaijin basically defaults you into the nearby regions, based on your country, probably off some static table. For example, I live in Norway. So I have a decent enough ping to the UK and the fiber-cables under the sea to the US. And I can get something like 150ms pings to New York (probably a little bit faster).

 

So clearly I can play on US servers, right? That makes sense, surely, and the game thinks so to, so that should be fine, yeah...? Turns out most of the US servers are actually placed on the west coast, so not only do I often get very high pings (..even if they're not actually that high, relatively speaking.., but I'll get back to that) - but I also have many more hops, as in nodes the packets have to traverse, which is potentially a huge problem.

 

Because - it means that when you stream something, the probability that something goes missing increases very quickly (read: when you're streaming, you're basically wildly spraying paint at a wall here while covering your eyes and mouth -- instead of carefully reaching out, placing a brush, going back, and then calmly confirming that the paint is where it should be visually. And then you have redundancy measures, too. But when you spray: get far enough from the wall, and you're going to have droplets miss the wall, and the paint will arrive in jumbled splurts once in a while - but you're still getting paint on the wall. Just it takes a really freaking long time to fill it, the picture is spotty, and you spray the ground and all the people standing downwind as well).

 

Or put in a different way, you can easily have a web-server (the patient painter) give you some web-page at exceptionally many hops and long distance - because you have error-correction and expected resends if something actually is lost. And it's not the end of the world if that happens either - you can read the header and the first few items as the rest of the page is painted silently. The protocol you're using also expects the packets to be alive for very long, so you don't kill packets that are not delivered before main working hours ends - you stay with it until closing time (which is something like a couple of seconds). When you stream, you don't do that - the whole idea is to get more and as current as possible info on the screen, so you send a lot of packets out with the expectation that some of them will be lost - but that most of them will arrive. And then there's no reply and communication back to confirm the accuracy - you just keep spraying. But after a relatively short while, you assume that they are lost (and the server will consider them out of date, and wait for current ones).

 

And this works great - until you end up in a situation where your route (your sequence of hops) to the server changes often during the stream. This happens, for example, if the internet gods find out that I actually have a decent route through Japan and to the West Coast of the US, for example, or from Australia. This actually happens for a significant amount of people in the EU-region, but I'm not quite close enough to China for that to happen.

 

But the ones that do have this special case where the route can suddenly flip between going through the UK and NY, and through Oceania and Japan to LA. So you're streaming towards the server in different directions across the planet - and now your stream arrives with a time difference and a new origin, and the establishing of the stream socket needs to be updated. Or more practically, the first stream becomes out of date as the second one is negotiated - and you lose this time for the negotiation, ending in a time-out scenario on the server for the first stream, and a pause in the second. Switch often enough, and you only have pauses - even if you potentially speaking actually had a reasonable route that really did deliver some of the paint.

 

Usually you don't actually flip routes like this, but the same happens when the internet gods choose paths that change significantly. You will see this in a video-call, or a skype stream or something like that, when the resolution drops for a while, or the sound and picture is out of sync. But because you have so much redundancy, the picture can survive a few breaks in the stream, and the stream appears reasonably current. Maybe you're finding the delay in the responses and sometimes overlapping talks a bit suspicious - but the system basically hides the fact that the stream is often as much as a second off, or more, and even sometimes catches up some late responses. There's entire research labs dedicated to this thing, and Apple (to just give you one example, where this is a huge thing) has something called "visual science" that essentially is dedicated to how the brain reacts to visual and other types of feedback lag. So that you can account for potentially very long delays, and hide that successfully for brains that sniff MacWorld a lot.

 

What happens when you have this kind of lag problem in an online game, though? An analogy would be something along the lines of that instead of having two people, who happen to be good friends, taking turns at talking at a comfortable, thoughtful pace - you have at least 32 people screaming at the same microphone, from three different rooms. And you're trying to focus on the area close around you, and need to pick out the noise that actually is intelligible and directed at you. And it's super-fast, and after 500ms, you've missed the start and probably also end of the conversation. As opposed to when you're just talking to someone on skype, where missing half a second means absolutely nothing whatsoever. With or without "visual science", you can still make out the words and where the conversation is going.

 

In the game, however, you don't really have that kind of time. So you need to add some visual science tricks (which all online games do - you record a set of events, and then extrapolate that when it arrives at the server, for example - so you buy a few hundred milliseconds, and balance that in confrontations after the events. You see that as a bit of jumble, and some accelerated firing, perhaps, or some curious damage and hit-box behaviour - but mostly, the normal lag you encounter up to 200ms, is mostly hidden. War Thunder also has a fairly slow pace, all things considered, that makes this smoother. So you can account for a certain amount of lag, in exactly the same way as with the skype call - it might not be perfect, but you can now follow the conversation just fine). And now you've basically solved the issue here, where the events on your server and on the clients will always be out of date. I.e., you send new paint-streams that have short range - and then extrapolate the work of art on the server, based on the few short-range streams that arrived. It's genius!

 

Except.. you still break completely once people have extreme pings, or very variable routes. You might not always see it (in fact, the visual science system can happily play back events that are seconds and seconds out of date, based on confrontations that targeted your ship several seconds ago, that you didn't even see as they happened and your plane was successfully shot down -- if it's not configured responsibly.. or is not configured to allow for as high pings as possible, to avoid disconnects). But there will be an expected delay that will be smoothed out.

 

And when this delay is too high, when the gameplay logic breaks into tiny pieces - the fact is that in 10/10 (game of the year!) cases, the visual lag compensation system is still going, and is far, far, away from even reacting to any of this. Two, three seconds out of date packages, that suddenly starts arriving again at a perfect clip? Seems valid to me! I'm sure it's no one who is cheating, it's probably just someone who randomly happens to have a legitimate 3 seconds long lag-spike - and it would surely be unfair to roll them back or disappear their packets that shoot down practically static/unresponsive planes from their point of view! It's all legitimate! All aboard the hype express to IGN-town! No one is left behind, and all people can connect, therefore the online game is a success! IGN says so, and so does the "technical experts" at Eurogamer.

 

In all fairness, most people who have intermittent pauses in their communication with the game servers are not cheaters. But they're also not told that they are playing in a way that either appears to others as cheating. Or that they're playing in a way that make them appear unresponsive, or do very strange strafes, or have directional changes that are impossible, etc. Instead, they're just defaulted into a server that actually is many, many hops too many away, and where they would be - even at perfect conditions - still push the visual science to the breaking points.

 

But that still is done. Usually because you want to minimize how many servers you have. And of course also because you want to allow friends to play on the same server. So you avoid making specific limitations on people's connection ranges, to not disconnect parties, or disallow certain people from playing. Though mostly, it is done to simply save server-space. RSPs are not free, and not overdimensioning is something that saves upkeep over time (note: gaijin actually do have a lot of servers, and not as many players, and a very large array of server space between their various games in all kinds of areas on the planet - so they wouldn't actually need to go this far with the lag-allowance. So gaijin's problem is simply that they don't have a holistic approach to how long their lag allowances to clients should be, and no dynamic way to choose servers in a game that happens to be determined as being in the middle of the client clusters, etc).

 

This is the unfortunate fact about all online games now, btw. There are all kinds of ways to limit (and successfully remove) these visual lag problems, by simply creating player clusters that have maximum spreads that the server system can allow at a predetermined breaking point (that again is determined by how short a delay you need to have the game appear reasonable at the pace it plays at). And then requiring that the clients have such and such consistency, with the RSP then arriving in their own limitations in response time for such and such amount of servers and clients. The tech is there, and it has also been rolled out in certain cases.

 

But once the release of the games arrive - someone is going to say: "I want to connect to this game that I bought, that I own, so I can just play online - and I don't care if the reason why I can't connect is that I am playing on a broken connection, or that I need to join the game that my friend from Mars is currently playing at the Venus hop". This is where years and years of visual science, lag prediction, smoothing algorithms, research and planning on execution diagrams for response time - falls apart. We didn't account for that someone is going to say "but I just want to play!", and no care about the game quality. This just didn't occur to us - but that's what rules the whole situation.

 

You have a support-department that's going to say, literally, that your game is broken because they have a guy on the phone from Mars, who pings perfectly fine to Daimos and all the local moons on Mars. And he's livid that he's booted from the game hosted on the Earth servers. Clearly, the game is technically broken if that happens, and the Mars guy should simply be allowed to "just play the game".

 

And that's where the discussion ends. All lag-smoothing and all protocol tweaking is completely wasted. Years and years of technical advances, massive programming efforts, huge testing cycles - it's all for nothing, because that damned guy from Mars is unhappy.

 

And that the end of that. Now everyone have to play with people from Mars. And so all online games have "lag-problems", in some frequency or other. Some of them legitimate problems (i.e., "I'm randomly slotted into a game on Saturn, and I didn't know! But that was the only place that had free spaces, and I sure as hell didn't want to wait more than three seconds for the game to start - that then lasts an hour. But I'm not going to wait!". Or "I play on wifi, but my anime skype calls to Japan streams perfectly fine - clearly my connection is stable enough to play an online game, if I can talk to people in Japan!"). Or - these are problems caused by the design, that the players are not going to be responsible for causing (although they will notice them, in degraded gameplay flow).

 

But some are not legitimate problems - as in the guy who adds lag programmatically to "compensate" for the other laggers, to make the game "fair" (aka, the "everyone shoots everyone around the corner, so all strategy is equally removed from every shootout in the game"- fix). To the people who actually buy ESP-cheats, that for example include packet obstructors and predictors, to create conditions where they don't get inaccurate hit-boxes (like everyone else is).

 

I'm not going to make a huge deal out of that cheating. It's not a huge deal. What is, though, is that the pauses and warps in the game - legitimately caused or not - are somehow become an accepted thing in online games. This is curious - because they're not actually necessary.

 

And I'm sorry about this endless rant - but this is what I want you to take away from this: it's possible, if we accept small restrictions on the clients, to have super-smooth international games(within reason). This would require minimal sacrifices from the players - as in your anime girlfriend from Japan needs to play only on the servers in the middle between you and her, if you want to play together. So the wait time to get into those servers might be higher than any other random place.

 

This surely is surmountable. The service provider's sacrifice is that they can no longer simply buy server space out of the back of a truck in Jakarta and deploy all the servers there because the price was cheap. And then let the lag-smoothing sort **** out. That's something that they then no longer can do, and they will need to account for a certain amount of redundancy on the servers (which surely makes complete sense in the first place anyway). So this is also surmountable.

 

The last problem is that you would require each client to have a working connection. This is actually where the only insurmountable problem starts - because tech-support will not be willing, or paid enough, or able, to sort this step out.

 

So just pointing this out: If everyone who played War Thunder played on their own region - this alone wouldn't be enough to actually fix everything. It would minimize the problems, but not actually solve them. By far - there are lots of areas inside the same region that have the same internet distance problems that I have to the East Coast of the US. Many places in the US have infinite amounts of hops to one side of the country, that are in fact much worse than the notoriously many copper-hops through Eastern Europe to Central Europe, for example. We're talking massive detours - that no one would be expected to account for, as they are of course sold "super fast fiber-optical cable on Compost", and so on. They cannot be expected to know that they actually need to connect to different servers.

 

And when the game then encourages them to connect to these far off servers too - why would they possibly think that they shouldn't be able to. Even with a working connection, that is the problem. And tech-support can't "fix" this. And so the responsibility to fix it lands on the coders.

 

Who then are asked the following: allow any amount of lag, and practically any amount of packet loss. While also not having visual lag in the game.

 

These mutually exclusive requirements is the heart of the issue here. And until this becomes prominent enough, and developers simply say that you can choose between having a game that makes sense visually and gameplay-wise. Or you can have a game that allows any connection. But you can't have both. Until that happens - you are going to have these "lag issues" that people make fun of developers they don't like for having.

 

It's not a very complicated issue. But it's sufficiently complicated that the people who call support and "just want to play" won't understand. And that's the issue here.

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Flying_Dodo said:

Anyway, I've found that even connecting to US servers, from inside the US, takes you from basically Virginia to California to AMSTERDAM, and then back to California.

You don't. You are going to hit amazon's login-array, and then get routed to somewhere in your region for the actual game-server. However, like pointed out in the very top of the "book", the game defaults you to both EU and US servers, regardless of your actual connection quality to either location.

 

That xxxx like this survives is the sole reason why laggers who deliberately connect to foreign servers, and cheaters as well, sit around laughing their arse off - while the game loses players like the servers are losing packets: you're too ill-informed, and you genuinely believe it when someone says: "oh, it's just your internet that's bad. Git guud". You have no defense, because you don't care to even try to have a nominal understanding of how the intertron works.

 

And instead it's "my internet is fine, meeeehhhnnmenhhnn", and "I like this game, so if I mindlessly support the devs it will magically become a great game that works by means of magic". Things really don't work that way, and it's xxxx pissing me off that anyone, anywhere, in reach of any kind of internet device, thinks so.

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, bv206_j said:

You don't. You are going to hit amazon's login-array, and then get routed to somewhere in your region for the actual game-server. However, like pointed out in the very top of the "book", the game defaults you to both EU and US servers, regardless of your actual connection quality to either location.

 

That xxxx like this survives is the sole reason why laggers who deliberately connect to foreign servers, and cheaters as well, sit around laughing their arse off - while the game loses players like the servers are losing packets: you're too ill-informed, and you genuinely believe it when someone says: "oh, it's just your internet that's bad. Git guud". You have no defense, because you don't care to even try to have a nominal understanding of how the intertron works.

 

And instead it's "my internet is fine, meeeehhhnnmenhhnn", and "I like this game, so if I mindlessly support the devs it will magically become a great game that works by means of magic". Things really don't work that way, and it's xxxx pissing me off that anyone, anywhere, in reach of any kind of internet device, thinks so.

Hmm, my hops show clearly routing through multiple Amsterdam servers, adding about 40ms to the trip, before returning to the US.

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, they don't. You have two possibilities going on here: 1. the trace you're running isn't actually towards the resolved server, but the nameserver or gateway that then gives you a route to the final server. Optionally, you're running a trace towards a stats-server or an update array. 2. The ping packets, that are very small and typically are marked as prioritized at your ISPs outside gateways(and not inside, for certain specific reasons that I'm not going to get into), has a tendency to get routed towards the least busy fiber routes - and then actually don't follow the same route as your other icmp traffic. This is extremely rare, but it could mean that your actual route for your icmp traffic is something else. Or, in some cases, that your local routes to your ISP (and it's subletters) are simply swamped constantly with other types of priority transport - which then in turn causes very strange route changes. You might also get the same type of strangeness going on if you or your ISP blocks certain types of packets or ports in parts of the network that isn't transparent to you as a client instance.

 

But in 99,9999% of the cases, we're just talking about running a trace to a nameserver or stats-server that routes you to a different final one (that subsequent traffic is directed at). For example - any BF4 game (and all Battlefield games using EA's backend) basically are dependent on EA's rickety network to be operative, in that you need a validation key from one of the hamster-wheel servers in the US locations -- to be allowed to be attached to their actual gameservers in Bogota, that they buy out of the back of some truck in Malaysia to save three pennies a year. You're not actually routed through the US to bogota - although for all intents and purposes they could just as well have done that considering the lag is atrocious anyway for both the RSPs server and the clients that connect to the game from literally everywhere with no limitations.


Similar, but not exactly the same issues that plague War Thunder, btw.

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay let me start by saying I'm a brainlet and networking stuff is way over my head. I haven't had any problem with high ping until the last update dropped. I ran a trace on all the US servers but I don't know where exactly the problem is or what I can do about it. Any help would be appreciated. As you can see it only goes through to the last 2 servers.1901295924_trace1.thumb.png.10ae54cf211b1941004520_trace2.thumb.png.6b17d555f4bd

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest SkyPaladine

Actualy, whatever the server I go (except asia where I get a 225ms ping) I run from 45 to 75ms... 

However, whatever the server I will use, I suddenly get packet losses, or very high pings for 4-5 seconds (enough to crash into a mountain or ground if playing a ship or a plane) 

I am actualy using a bridged connexion from 5Ghz wifi and 1Gb lan... Because I am on a 10Gb optic fiber line (actual download going up to 2.2Gb/s upload to 1.4Gb/s) 

Whatever the game I play online (ex.: Planetside 2 - 27-35ms / any mmorpg - 20-45ms / BF V - 18-25ms / World of T/WS/WP I usualy play with a 35-40ms) I never got ANY packet loss in any of those games since I got this line (actualy 18 month) I am working with Filipino servers that are very bad and never had problems sending very big files (up to 3Tb data with no interuption, except the Filipino server can't handle more than 80-100Mb/s ... and still, never had any packet loss or connection problems)

I remember Wargaming having exactly these kind of problems 2 years ago... But since they did upgrade "some" of their servers, those problems aren't happenning anymore.... 

 

Pingtest.thumb.JPG.fb3ea014300a6853f7f41

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

joined a eu battle(live in the netherlands)

first deployment was ok but then i wanted to fight in my bf109 and i got a ping of 999 and now i have to wait for 5 mins, thats utter bs,

either fix the ping or get rid of the 5min punishment because this is just rubbing it in.

Edited by FlyingDutchMan19
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  2     *        *        *     Request timed out.

 

I get this to both IP:s so the reason is net provider? Does it matter that i am using my phones internet ?

 

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, vectra4x4 said:

  2     *        *        *     Request timed out.

 

I get this to both IP:s so the reason is net provider? Does it matter that i am using my phones internet ?

 

it's more likely that the server on hop 2 is configured to not respond to pings (ICMP packets). so without

the rest of the ping result it's hard to tell if there is an issue or not. and to get (more) reliable results you

should use a tool that is periodically testing the connection for a certain amount of time (like pingplotter

pinging the server every 15 - 30 seconds for a few hours... especially if this is done on peak hours (or

your usual gaming times) this could reveal connection issues more reliable that just a single ping)

 

whether a mobile phone connection is good or bad for gaming kinda depends on the connection quality

and the network speed ofc... usually wired connections (like DSL) are more reliable - or they have been

in the past at least ^^ nowadays with 4G, LTE and soon 5G this may be different ofc.

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tracing route to 95.211.246.163 over a maximum of 30 hops

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  192.168.42.129 
  2     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  3    31 ms    19 ms    17 ms  10.64.198.161 
  4    40 ms    18 ms    21 ms  213.192.186.82 
  5    50 ms    25 ms    19 ms  213.192.186.81 
  6    68 ms    38 ms    38 ms  213.192.184.254 
  7    49 ms    42 ms    42 ms  et-1-0-0.bb04.ams-01.leaseweb.net [80.249.209.215] 
  8    55 ms    49 ms    42 ms  ae-104.br01.ams-01.nl.leaseweb.net [31.31.38.141] 
  9    71 ms    42 ms    43 ms  be-10.cr02.ams-01.nl.leaseweb.net [81.17.34.21] 
 10    81 ms    50 ms    42 ms  po-1006.ce01.ams-01.nl.leaseweb.net [81.17.33.131] 
 11    43 ms    51 ms    41 ms  95.211.246.163 

Trace complete.

Tracing route to 95.211.246.161 over a maximum of 30 hops

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  192.168.42.129 
  2     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  3    41 ms    18 ms    18 ms  10.64.205.141 
  4    31 ms    19 ms    24 ms  213.192.186.82 
  5    37 ms    17 ms    18 ms  213.192.186.81 
  6    64 ms    40 ms    38 ms  213.192.184.254 
  7    77 ms    41 ms    40 ms  et-1-0-0.bb04.ams-01.leaseweb.net [80.249.209.215] 
  8    69 ms    42 ms    42 ms  ae-104.br01.ams-01.nl.leaseweb.net [31.31.38.141] 
  9    64 ms    41 ms    41 ms  be-10.cr02.ams-01.nl.leaseweb.net [81.17.34.21] 
 10    66 ms    42 ms    50 ms  po-1004.ce01.ams-01.nl.leaseweb.net [81.17.33.127] 
 11    61 ms    43 ms    41 ms  95.211.246.161 

Trace complete.
 

so these are the results for both EU servers. Funny thing is that in game i play with pretty smooth 60ping. And last year i didnt have any packet loss problems. these problems have startet just this year. I have the same hardware and software i used before so everything should be smooth.

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could someone please help to explain what this means? why do I not see all of the hops?

 

Tracing route to 95.211.246.163 over a maximum of 30 hops

  1     4 ms     3 ms     4 ms  192.168.0.1
  2     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  3    34 ms    14 ms    19 ms  aztw-core-2b-xe-303-0.network.virginmedia.net [62.252.231.201]
  4     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  5     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  6   131 ms    56 ms    19 ms  m686-mp2.cvx1-b.lis.dial.ntli.net [62.254.42.174]
  7    18 ms    15 ms    15 ms  213.46.174.118
  8    27 ms    26 ms    30 ms  ldn-bb3-link.telia.net [62.115.134.134]
  9    25 ms    24 ms    25 ms  adm-bb3-link.telia.net [213.155.136.99]
 10    23 ms    22 ms    24 ms  adm-b3-link.telia.net [62.115.122.179]
 11    24 ms    23 ms    26 ms  leaseweb-ic-308104-adm-b3.c.telia.net [62.115.48.210]
 12    40 ms    27 ms    26 ms  be-11.cr02.ams-01.nl.leaseweb.net [81.17.34.23]
 13    30 ms    25 ms    35 ms  po-1002.ce01.ams-01.nl.leaseweb.net [81.17.33.123]
 14    25 ms    23 ms    23 ms  95.211.246.163

Trace complete.

 

Tracing route to 95.211.246.163 over a maximum of 30 hops

  0  DESKTOP-SMP0891 [192.168.0.23]
  1  192.168.0.1
  2     *        *        *
Computing statistics for 25 seconds...
            Source to Here   This Node/Link
Hop  RTT    Lost/Sent = Pct  Lost/Sent = Pct  Address
  0                                                                      DESKTOP-SMP0891 [192.168.0.23]
                                              0/ 100 =  0%   |
  1    3ms     0/ 100 =  0%     0/ 100 =  0%  192.168.0.1

Trace complete.

 

I have been experiencing packet loss and being kicked out of 90% of matches for the last two weeks. I notice at random in a match I will start to see my packet loss start increasing from 1% up to 15% over maybe 20 seconds and then it drops to 0 along with my ping also to 0 then I get kicked out of the match. Sometimes it happens fairly quickly from the start and at other times in could be 10 mins in.

Edited by waldopb
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, waldopb said:

Could someone please help to explain what this means? why do I not see all of the hops?

 

some routing devices may be configured to not respond to pings (ICMP packets) for instance to prevent DoS attacks thus the pings will time out.

also pings are rather low priority packets / requests so certain routing devices may reply to the request if they got enough free capacity (low usage

/ throughput) but may not (or stop) once they reach a certain threshold.

 

as long as the devices (hops) after one certain hop respond to the ping there is nothing to worry about because if there would be an error / problem

on the device / hop that is not responding all communication after this device / hop would not be possible (time out).

 

so overall your ping looks just fine (though there seems to be some jitter (variations in the ping (for instance pings to hop 6 take between 131ms and

19ms)) for an unknown reason - could be congestion or whatever... anyhow this ping result does not explain why you see packet losses let alone why

you are getting disconnected at times.

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, waldopb said:

Can you explain why I only see 1 hop for the packet loss?

 

unfortunately the pathping command relies on replies / responses to the ICMP packets.

since hop 2 (the first device on your ISPs network) does not respond to the packets the

pathping ends here.

 

ping, tracert and pathping are very 'limited' tools and especially nowadays with all the 

changes that have been made to the internet infrastructure (and or the devices / nodes

and their configurations (for instance DoS protection etc)) they are getting less and less

useful =/

 

you could try other (more specialized) tools like (e.g.) pingplotter that can trace more

consistantly (and continously) - often those tools don't use the standard (icmp) ping so

certain limitations (and blocks) can be prevented / bypassed.

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Comrades.

I'm not sure how but I have very bad ping and pl when connecting to the US servers. This is the first time this problem occurs for me. Before this (recent patch), I got a steady 1++ms ping and 0% pl whenever I play in US servers. Anyways, I did include my netinfo.txt for reference.

Spasiba Tovarisch.

Ping & PL.jpg

netinfo.txt

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this thread even alive? Ok so my ping jumps up and down for no reason at all and i get stuff like "SERVER NOT RESPONDING" and "BAD NETWORK CONNECTION" but i can play any other game with no issues but War Thunder is just horrible it boots me out it jumps my ping from 60 to 999 i cant return to the game because that return option does not work. Any of you know the problem? I got this one day 

shot 2020.04.15 17.33.03.jpg

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.