When desyncs will be fixed?

Yeah i have to agree with the OP its getting a lot worse ATM

With my ranger i will fire an arrow and it will travel through the target looking as though it hasn't hit, then 0.5ish of a second later the hit lands, this happens about 50% of the time now and is to say the least annoying.

Also mobs will routinely appear and disappear making it very hard to play safely.(hardcore).

I'm not sure what you can do about this other than get new servers or rewrite the code, but i will say that 2-3 months ago this would happen maybe once or twice per hour not all the time.

Lagg is better than desync as one you can plan for and the other you cant.


P.S i have a 14mb down 6mb up per second(unlimited) connection. not fiber optic standard but not dial up slow either.

To 0nin:

In case #2: it's called latency. Latency, a delay between your action and server response. And there are ways to deal with it in some genres. For example, make artificial latency to balance players latencies in RTS. So it guaranties that input won't be processed in lesser than artificial latency time. It doesn't work so good for FPS. At least I can't give an example of such FPS. Example of strategy? StarCraft 1.

How to deal with latency? Well, we take as given that all calculations done at server and make no predictions on clients. What can we do? Make assumptions about player actions on server side. If player currently attacks and has latency 60 ms, it means server calculates that player will attack next 60 ms. If player gives other input, it won't be used this same moment on client. It should be sent to server first, then server processes input and sends data to client. Change of your example:

T0ms: I'm almost getting hit by a big attack. I Whirling Blade away. I send input data to server.
T50ms: The attack hits. I die on the server.
T100ms: The server receives my input to Whirling Blade away. Sadly, I'm already dead.
T200ms: My client receives the calculation that I am dead. I promptly die, never using the Whirling Blades.

NO DESYNC.

What could I do to not die?

Issue whirling blades earlier. Players can adapt to issue commands half second earlier. That's NO BIG PROBLEM. As opposed to desyncs.

Edit: this network prediction system reminded me one saying: early (premature) optimization is a root of all evil. Devs should have made network system bruteforce first, without optimizations, and only later if optimization would have been required, optimize it, without introducing desyncs. Not introduce desyns in first place and try to heroically fight those windmills created by them.

"

idarktemplar wrote:

T0ms: I'm almost getting hit by a big attack. I Whirling Blade away. I send input data to server.
T50ms: The attack hits. I die on the server.
T100ms: The server receives my input to Whirling Blade away. Sadly, I'm already dead.
T200ms: My client receives the calculation that I am dead. I promptly die, never using the Whirling Blades.

NO DESYNC.

Trust me, you don't want your client to ALWAYS be 100ms behind the server. It'll either make your game respond very slowly, or just make everything look out of sync all the time anyway.

What do you think is gonna happen if you issue a new command at T100ms, which is incompatible with the server's calculations of that same time, but which your client only realized at T200ms? Desync, that's what.

"

0nin wrote:

Trust me, you don't want your client to ALWAYS be 100ms behind the server. It'll either make your game respond very slowly, or just make everything look out of sync all the time anyway.

What do you think is gonna happen if you issue a new command at T100ms, which is incompatible with the server's calculations of that same time, but which your client only realized at T200ms? Desync, that's what.

No, it won't desync. In model I described, you issue command, but it isn't executed on client until server said it's ok. Yes, it's always has latency, but I've played with latency a lot more than 100 ms. I tell you I can do that, I can play with delay between command issue and command execution. I can't with desyncs.

Edit: if you order one command, and later order new incompatible command, first server will execute first command and then will try to execute second, incompatible one. And, probably fail. It's incompatible, right? There is no order cancellation in RPG, that's not RTS. But you can try to abort your order with compatible new one.

"

idarktemplar wrote:

Edit: if you order one command, and later order new incompatible command, first server will execute first command and then will try to execute second, incompatible one. And, probably fail. It's incompatible, right? There is no order cancellation in RPG, that's not RTS. But you can try to abort your order with compatible new one.

And you don't think you'd be annoyed that that whirling blades you totally just cast, didn't happen because the game reacts too slow?

"

0nin wrote:

And you don't think you'd be annoyed that that whirling blades you totally just cast, didn't happen because the game reacts too slow?

No, I would adapt to issue orders in advance according to my latency.

Well, then I guess we'll have to agree to disagree - that is, you and the developers, since they're obviously more interested in allowing faster paced gameplay.

It isn't really faster as it is now. Desyncs make game very slow paced quite often.

Edit: My model doesn't make game slow. It just makes player think in advance a little bit more.

I get a LOT of desyncs too and it really annoys me. However, GGG have done the correct thing by having the server update the gamestate. At least their is now a chance to improve the code (and possibly increase server performance) and end up with everything working correctly.

The more client side calculations are made, the more chance of the game being hacked. And to be honest, games get hacked very very quickly.

GGG asked what the beta testers wanted done next, and people wanted a better endgame. So they have been spending a lot of time on maps and then PvP. People wanted more content, so act 3 is coming up. Now, people want the desync improved. I would not be surprised if that is near the top of the list and we might see improvements in the upcoming months.

"

hzflank wrote:

I get a LOT of desyncs too and it really annoys me. However, GGG have done the correct thing by having the server update the gamestate. At least their is now a chance to improve the code (and possibly increase server performance) and end up with everything working correctly.

The more client side calculations are made, the more chance of the game being hacked. And to be honest, games get hacked very very quickly.

GGG asked what the beta testers wanted done next, and people wanted a better endgame. So they have been spending a lot of time on maps and then PvP. People wanted more content, so act 3 is coming up. Now, people want the desync improved. I would not be surprised if that is near the top of the list and we might see improvements in the upcoming months.

It's not NOW I want desyncs fixed. I posted similar thread about 2 month ago. So long, no improvement. maxor in this thread even said it became worse. I don't want to get some calculations on client-side. Full server side is ok for me. I just want it to be made proper way, not some buggy prediction desyncing crap.