Hidden blade's unseen strike not triggering Mjolner correctly.

"

Sarno#0493 wrote:

"

BaumisMagicalWorld#0673 wrote:

I want to know whether their current implementation has any noticeable effects on performance. Because, if it does, sure sounds a lot better to have the game drastically reduce the calcs required. Currently, there's no PC on the market that we can buy that can run certain builds at a stable framerate. Doesn't matter if you have the latest hardware, the game engine will bottleneck you anyway.

The game is server-authoritative.

The tracking that does or does not get performed server-side has no relevance to your client's FPS.

Gameplay progression is gated by the server tick rate. If the server can’t process simulation ticks fast enough because of heavy calculations, complex builds, or CPU bottlenecks the authoritative game state updates stall.
The client continues rendering, but literally no one care about that because the game is effectively paused for no reason on the client view.

"

Mark_GGG wrote:

check if their id is even or odd to determine whether that action uses the main or off hand.

Did someone say spaghetti?

"

xiaoxiao921#3803 wrote:

If the server can’t process simulation ticks fast enough because of heavy calculations, complex builds, or CPU bottlenecks the authoritative game state updates stall.

What a strange thing to say...


1. "heavy calculations, complex builds, or CPU bottlenecks" - While I'm always happy to see someone using the Oxford comma, listing two examples of CPU bottlenecks immediately before the words "or CPU bottlenecks" is very weird.

2. "If the server can’t process simulation ticks fast enough [...] the authoritative game state updates stall." - I posted about a server incrementing a number. Just how many milliseconds of work are you attributing to that?


If you want to post about something other than what I myself have commented on, feel free - but next time please don't quote me when doing so. Baumi asked about how tracking is performed while expressing misgivings about performance and what any "PC on the market" can accomplish - therefore clearly talking about client-side performance. I responded to that, and I stand by that response. I didn't put words in anyone's mouth - please don't do that to me.

"

Sarno#0493 wrote:

Baumi asked about how tracking is performed while expressing misgivings about performance and what any "PC on the market" can accomplish - therefore clearly talking about client-side performance.

Yes and no. I've been told before that Lockstep Mode doesn't affect performance. On a technical level, it shouldn't, but I proved that it did, and I've known this for years. You cannot play certain builds with Lockstep; first the network and FPS goes to shit, then the network is basically playing catch up and FPS goes stable until the game recovers. I've been dealing with this specific issue for years, as CWDT builds are like my thing, and it didn't improve with better internet or a better PC. Not even my 9800X3D can deal with this, the red bar (CPU) is consistently the longest.

GGG made the first huge change a couple years back with the fix to Ignite tracking, which vastly improved performance for builds applying tons of Ignites per second. If I had a time machine and could somehow port my build back over there, it would be literally unplayable, as even weaker/less spammy versions were already unplayable, regardless of which networking mode you used.

Hence my question on how this tracking works. Because if it's affecting performance, I wonder what reason they have to track all these individual spells as a separate action, not just as an entity. All of those stats they are tracking should be applicable to CWDT itself as the, let's call it, "parent operator". If you get what I'm trying to say.

Edit: For example, as I currently understand it, CWDT applies a global cooldown to each socketed spell, not itself. If GGG were to change this to instead apply to each CWDT gem itself, it could alleviate some of these extra calculations. Flipside being that this opens you up to using the same spells across several setups. And would that be so bad in current PoE? We already have cooldowns to balance things out.

"

Sarno#0493 wrote:

"

xiaoxiao921#3803 wrote:

If the server can’t process simulation ticks fast enough because of heavy calculations, complex builds, or CPU bottlenecks the authoritative game state updates stall.

What a strange thing to say...


1. "heavy calculations, complex builds, or CPU bottlenecks" - While I'm always happy to see someone using the Oxford comma, listing two examples of CPU bottlenecks immediately before the words "or CPU bottlenecks" is very weird.

Client's cpu vs server's cpu.

Thanks Mark,

why don't you guys document more like this? I would love if you would create the content for "the wiki" ...

Leaving room for exploration as someone once said, is nothing I personally like too much.