PoE 2 servers are restarting in: .
They should be back up in approximately .POE WILL BE THE NEW VANGUARD IF THEY DONT CHANGE SHIT UP
"I am none of these, not even amateur level (well, maybe the database one). But I do have a lot of experience in network security; hence, both the claims of "fuck security, make it 100% client-side" and "you need desync in order to ensure a secure PoE experience" both frustrate me to no end, because I know there are better ways. Furthermore, as a network security guy, the acronym CIA means to me: Confidentiality - those without read access cannot read Integrity - those without create/edit/delete access cannot create/edit/delete Availability - those with ____ access can ____ (read, create, edit, delete) I understand the need for confidentiality and integrity. Seriously. But you need all three; availability is a major factor of security, and making accurate monster position data unavailable to the players is a network security failure. When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted. Last edited by ScrotieMcB#2697 on Feb 14, 2014, 3:21:26 PM
|
|
" To be honest if you actually want to make the game 100% secure you need to attempt to hack into your own software to see the things you overlook. There are players legit hacking right now with bots and injecting based methods (which are like 100% detectable) to maphack the game. While our current lovely super desync version of the game might not make hacking super rampant, it's kinda moot when people are going to try anyway and your not going to put the hammer of justice on them right away and patch up the game the moment something is found. Same thing with RMT trade, but that's a different issue. Last edited by RagnarokChu#4426 on Feb 14, 2014, 3:49:28 PM
|
|
" You raise an interesting point regarding the lack of prediction and make a couple of good suggestions (mostly regarding single player). I'd again agree that you can, for single player, have a mostly desync free experience with determinism. That is where it ends. You are misunderstanding or not accounting for some details regarding the dynamics of simulating for multiple clients. In that case your predictions are still not going to be verifiably correct in the presence of discontinuous state. Reconciling state (similar to the case of resync) is going to be a big issue if you additionally decouple monster animation from action and effect, as you propose. Importantly, the considerations involving latency need a bit of clarification. You seriously need to take into account that you effectively have two sets of latencies, the network latency or ping...and actual state latency. What I mean by this, is that unless you are trying to keep state as up to date as possible where and when necessary (since the key to an accurate simulation or convergence is sampling, integrating and solving at the right times, not necessarily at all times, mainly near or around discontinuities, eg when a sequence of 0s shifts to 1), your state is obviously getting more stale. As it is, I think PoE fails horribly at that part. It doesn't catch and treat discontinuities quickly or well enough, not sure about the details. |
|
|
@MMM: I agree the system works a lot better with single-player than multi-player (to such a point I wonder if my suggestion should apply exclusively to single-player and ignore party play). I also agree that my model for multiplayer leaves unresolved problems.
As I said earlier
Spoiler
Client (simulation of) gamestate, current
Current player animations (movement and skills): zero delay Monster animations (movement and skills): 200ms delay Other player animations (movement and skills): 200ms delay Client (simulation of) gamestate, suggested Current player animations (movement and skills): zero delay Monster animations (movement and skills): zero delay* Other player animations (movement and skills): 100ms delay, or 200ms if opting out** So the question becomes, which interaction do you care about more? Let's say you have a melee guy partying with a friend who's playing ranged, and they enter a door-heavy (thus desync-heavy) dungeon. If "Ranged" holds the Shift key firing in, and Melee doesn't use Shift, chances are Melee is going to experience a desync teleport at some point on his screen; however, by virtue of holding down Shift, Ranged is more likely to see things the way the server sees it, with Melee's behavior being erratic and not as intended. Now under what I'm suggesting, Melee would be very unlikely to see a desync teleport, but Ranged would probably see one. In other words, the victim of the desync is transferred rather than mitigated. Now make it two Melee players instead of a mix, and it might be a trade-off; each causes the other's desync. I imagine there are few ways of looking at this. 1. My suggestion would be pro-melee in general, since they're currently the most frequent victims of desync. 2. My suggestion would make it so the desync you receive is primarily due to the practices of other players, rather than your own. This could lead to rage toward party members who refuse to practice desync mitigation (such as holding down Shift). Perhaps most importantly, a group of 3 or more might experience higher levels of desync than they do currently. Naturally, direct network communication between players in multiplayer could help mitigate this (essentially halving the desync window), but there are security risks involved with that (which might, in turn, be mitigated). Also, half of 5 (other-players, in a full party) is still 2.5, which is considerably more than 1 (current-player). So the question then becomes: how often would that many players simultaneously put themselves in high-desync-risk situations like narrow passageways? If it's just two at a time, no one's worse off. Would the timing of everything work out such that players give desync to other players at convenient times, or inconvenient ones? When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted. Last edited by ScrotieMcB#2697 on Feb 14, 2014, 4:32:57 PM
|
|
" To be fair, it is incredibly hard to say if what you propose would actually be worse than the current method in party play. I sort of imagine it being more chaotic, but it could easily enough be a general improvement. What I meant with the dual state bit is that my biggest concern is about the frequency of state transmission (and/or verification itself, including methods of measuring error). It doesn't really matter if my ping is 50ms but state is only verified and subsequently corrected at multiple second intervals, nevermind the accuracy or correctness of the verification or error measuring process itself. |
|
" And you can drive your car over 80 mph 'on demand' as well. For the most part it's safe enough, but in some circumstances you may 'desynch' with the road. So what's to blame, the lousy car, the crappy road, or reckless driving? They're all contributing factors, but ultimately it's up to you to continually judge how fast you can drive your car without losing control. Wraeclast is a far cry from a controlled-access freeway. The trails are crooked and treacherous, poorly marked and maintained, and packed with lethal hazards. Some players think you can build a high-performance steamroller so powerful it can plow through anything at top speed. For the most part, they're right, but every once in while they hit an unexpected pitfall that glitches their ride. "This sucks! Why doesn't somebody fix this stupid road!?!" I play a character that uses Cyclone to blind and leech life off trash mobs. With Cyclone you never get stunned and you can spin right through crowds that would normally block your progress. I've played this character enough to learn how quickly this advantage can get me into trouble. All you have to do is plow straight through the crowd, ignore the stragglers, and keep pushing forward. Sooner or later, shit will hit the fan and you'll get snapped back to some random spot in the middle of a mob scene. So Cyclone sucks and it's GGG's fault, right? Maybe so, but what matters to me is whether I can make it work safely and effectively for my own purposes. It's not my main skill for either movement or attack, it's for maneuvering and herding the crowds. I have heavy-duty skills that actually kill things, Cyclone is just a meat tenderizer. Here's how I use it in practice: 1. Zoom into melee range, about halfway in, so I can actually distinguish between targets and the ground, rather than just haphazardly click on things. 2. Cyclone sideways in short bursts through the leading edge of the crowd, picking off the initial targets I can reach with my main melee attack. 3. Keep most of the mobs on-screen so I can easily keep track of them. Take advantage of their tendency to close in on you, and Cyclone's ability to blitz right through them. 4. Leave no stragglers behind and clean up the mess before you move on. Don't use Cyclone for hiking to the next mob, give it a chance to cool off. TL;DR: Wraeclast is a degenerate hazardous crapshoot, don't roll the dice any more than you have to. Gems like Cyclone are not refined and polished diamonds, they're crude raw materials you can fashion into something effective but not foolproof. Take care and proceed with caution. Last edited by RogueMage#7621 on Feb 14, 2014, 4:52:03 PM
|
|
|
I am amazed by the information being shared right now. I honestly have never read such well written and informative responses on a game forum. I wonder if GGG is aware of the possible way to fix single player desync. I never had considered how much more complicated it would be to fix desync with 6 people in a party all using different movement speeds, atk speeds and movement skills. I'm guessing this problem will never be fixed for multiplayer, especially because they had new skills consistently.
ign sweetumss
|
|
" This is not so simple, even in SinglePlayer, for two reasons: 1) Since the simulation on the server is different from the client, the same AI will lead to different outputs, thus to butterfly effect/discontinuities. 2) As explicitly stated by Rhys, combat and movement are very correlated, so you cannot make one predictable and the other one not predictable. This means that PoE would need anyhow the resymc mechanism (/oos) which is the main cause of all this stuff. (I mean... the need of resync is the problem.... not the resync) I strongly believe that the only way to seriously solve desync in a complex game such as PoE is determinism or maybe x10 the number of servers. In single player determinism fully solves the problem. In multiplayer it can be reached a state which is equivalent to current situation, but which let the client make /oos whenever you want, instantly, and without bandwidth overload for the server, the only issue is a few 0.1 sec of latency/delay between players. Roma timezone (Italy)
|
|
" There is no way, in a month of Sundays, that GGG would do something, anything, that would better the sync, game play, experience, QoL, or anything.. of single player if it didn't benefit multi player equally or more. They discourage SP, they encourage MP. They immediately lowered monster life in MP (after the initial increases) when it was seen that a few saw the faceroll of MP no longer quite enough for them to forego their preferred solo play and returned to it. Casually casual. Last edited by TheAnuhart#4741 on Feb 14, 2014, 4:56:06 PM
|
|
"Quoted for irony; this applies far more to the current state of affairs than my suggestion. Also pretty sure he didn't say that. "The nature of their prejudice is apparent to me as well. However, I disagree about the situation being hopeless. When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted.
|
|
