|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
16
   |
Posted - 2015.10.09 20:00:00 -
[1] - Quote
Sounds like a pretty bad idea to me, Dennie.
Carrot > Stick.
I love the game, I buy boosters and respecs often, and I try to play as regularly as I can. I also leave matches every day for lots of different reasons; lag/stability is chief among them. If you were to hit me with a stick for leaving a match when it lagged, I can assure you that I'd turn the game off instead of trying to find a playable battle. The less I play, the less likely I'll be to buy boosters and respecs. Pushing away paying customers doesn't seem like a sound business strategy. Further, and perhaps more importantly, with headcounts seldom topping 3k/day, I don't think that now would be a good time to whip out the stick.
Here are my suggestions:
1) Improve gameplay performance and stability. Cut graphics. Convert socket maps to static maps. Reduce players per battle. Do whatever it takes. Making cuts is acceptable; instability is not.
2) Remove server selection. Set everyone's battleserver to automatic. Group players by region and ping when PCU permits; otherwise, group players by ping. Boot players beyond permissible lag thresholds from match. Abort matches if/when the lag cannot be remedied (so players don't have to).
3) Add an ISK/SP bonus for completing consecutive matches.
4) Fix what's wrong with pub pay. Coming into a match late should not guarantee a paycheck of pennies. Same goes for being put on a team with a disproportionately high number of rep logis. Err on the side of your customers. Too much pay is better than not enough.
5) Reward personal effort and achievement. Try keep-what-you-kill and see how it works. People might not like the idea, but it's a whole lot less risky than whipping out the stick.
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
16
|
Posted - 2015.10.09 21:16:00 -
[2] - Quote
Haolo Geardreck wrote:
I fully agree with an option to leave if your ping gets too high, but not auto-boot. I get spikes during most matches, but its generally low ping. And I mean spikes that seem to be about 2500 for a few seconds.
I'm suggesting that low-latency and high-latency players be grouped by like type. I've no technical understanding of how these things work, but if instances exist wherein one player's connection is causing framerate drops and rubberbanding for other players, that player is ruining the match and needs to go.
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
16
|
Posted - 2015.10.09 23:09:00 -
[3] - Quote
Haolo Geardreck wrote:deezy dabest wrote:Adipem Nothi wrote:Haolo Geardreck wrote:
I fully agree with an option to leave if your ping gets too high, but not auto-boot. I get spikes during most matches, but its generally low ping. And I mean spikes that seem to be about 2500 for a few seconds.
I'm suggesting that low-latency and high-latency players be grouped by like type. I've no technical understanding of how these things work, but if instances exist wherein one player's connection is causing framerate drops and rubberbanding for other players, that player is ruining the match and needs to go. This sounds highly exploitable in my opinion and would probably make lag switches a real thing. Forcing yourself into that lower group and then bumping your connection back up to normal to farm those who have lower connections would be the padding of all padding. Between net code, server side hit detection, and an insane amount of calculations I see the whole thing as a cluster **** which personally I am glad I am not one of the ones trying to fix it. I feel like step 1 should be damage normalization, reducing the load on the server when it comes to applying damage would be a big help. It does not sound like much but when you are dealing with ping times as low as 20 - 30ms for some people a simple 10ms extra time processing on the server suddenly becomes huge. Going beyond that I really do not see any great way to handle high latency players without either punishing them or hurting game play for everyone. I feel like pretty good work has been done reducing the benefit of fast suits used in conjunction with a slow connection and whatever was done we could use a lot more of. For those who know how, yea, it would be an easy exploit. High latency players shouldn't even be trying to play something so fast-paced in my opinion. I've been the laggy guy before, I just picked up a different game instead of ruining it for everyone. If they don't have that decency or are simply unwilling to get better internet (if available), I feel like some firm of punishment is in order, even if its just the first part of the stick: a longer queue or such. The server will also know their lag and keep from making their punishment harsher for simple disconnects. Due to a terrible ISP.
Again, I've no understanding of how these things work ... but why wouldn't this work?
Set Low Latency queue's bounce threshold at Ping(A) - Ping(C).
Set High Latency queue's bounce threshold at Ping(X) - Ping(Z).
Group players by region and ping.
If a player with Ping(A) - Ping(C) is detected in the High Latency Queue, kick him.
If a player with Ping(X) - Ping(Z) is detected in the Low Latency Queue, kick him.
If a player spoofs his latency to get into the wrong queue, he'd be booted when he "unspoofs" and exceeds the queue's thresholds. Right?
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
16
|
Posted - 2015.10.10 01:26:00 -
[4] - Quote
deezy dabest wrote:
That is absolutely a programming night mare not to mention terrible for the player base. What about people that have unreliable internet? Are they suppose to just get kicked from every battle because someone in the house started or stopped downloading a torrent?
You also have to account for additional server load of monitoring 32 people per battle times how ever many battles.
Why would anyone ever bother logging into a game that they are out right punished because their internet is not the greatest. Not everyone lives in a large metropolitan area and has access to cable or fiber like we do.
I was under the impression that player pings are already being logged and monitored (source).
Either way, you have a good point.
To be clear, I'm not looking to "punish" anyone for having less-than-reliable internet (or a roommate), and I wouldn't want to propose anything which might detrimentally impact headcounts. The above idea is probably bad for reasons you've provided, but the goal -- to improve match stability -- is not a bad goal. I've played lots of AAA shooters over the years at a wide range of connection speeds; latency problems came up from time-to-time, but never have I experienced recurring issues with framerate drops and rubberbanding like so many of us do here in DUST.
All of this is relevant to Dennie's concerns.
DUST has stability issues. Some players "work around" those issues by leaving broken battles in hopes of finding better ones. This is reasonable behavior. It would be unreasonable to punish these players for wanting to play smooth matches.
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
17
|
Posted - 2015.10.14 03:10:00 -
[5] - Quote
Kalante Schiffer wrote:Well one way to fix balance is to remove scanners once and for all ...
I suspect Kalante's correct. Sadly, this would help far more than it'd hurt.
That said, fixing Active Scanners would likely be a better approach.
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
17
|
Posted - 2015.10.14 12:23:00 -
[6] - Quote
Shaun Iwairo wrote:One Eyed King wrote:Shaun Iwairo wrote:I'm trying my hardest but I can't think of another game with a similar mechanic to scanners function of 'revealing enemy players on the map without actually seeing them'. I'm sure a lot of you have played Destiny, so you'll know that one of the things that made Thorn OP was that you could see you enemy through walls from their DoT ticks. Unlike scanners, you had to see them and land a shot on them first to get that effect. If anyone knows any other examples of Dusts scanner in other FPSs I think they'd be worth discussing.
As for balancing the scanner, why not have it only highlight enemies within line of sight to the person doing the scanning? It would change it from being more or less a wallhack to something more like an auto-spotter. In some of the previous CoD games, you could call in a drone that would give away enemy positions. One specific type would also reveal the direction enemies face. There were also perks that would prevent showing up, and you could shoot down the drone with a missile, but that doesn't take away from the fact this is essentially an active scan. Thanks for the example. IIRC it showed them on the minimap but didn't tag them in-game, AKA it had no wallhack effect. It was also on a longish cool-down so to speak - the earliest you could get it was after a 3 kill streak - and it could only be used once per life. Makes our scanner sound pretty OP.
It's been awhile. IIRC, these only affected the minimap:
http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/SR-71_Blackbird
http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/Advanced_UAV
http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/Orbital_VSAT
Example:
https://youtu.be/HSAiOortWFI?t=338
Painting target locations to HUD was supposedly achievable via hack but was never a killstreak (IIRC):
https://youtu.be/tx3P6KkFHo4?t=20
* Also, perma-scan wasn't ever a thing in CoD. Even if you were playing with a good team, UAVs typically had more downtime than uptime, and the more advanced killstreaks seldom seen.
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
17
|
Posted - 2015.10.14 12:44:00 -
[7] - Quote
Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:I'm not convinced by this.
The reason people quit matches is typically because they're against nigh-unstoppable slaughtersquads of proto. Forcing them against these people is not going to make them play and is much more likely to lead to frustration and eventual quitting.
I don't think the 'muh precious kdr' view is nearly as prevalent amongst match leavers as people seem to think it is.
Beautifully put, good sir.
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
|
|
| |
|