cRPG
cRPG => cRPG Technical problems => Topic started by: Butan on February 17, 2011, 02:17:14 pm
-
I know I'm not the first to complain about this, and I'm not posting it to blame someone/something, but its getting pretty ridiculous for me to try to play at 100% efficiency.
Being a no-shield poledude doesnt help, because I need to react pretty fast to attacks if I dont want to die like a newbie; and I dont want to spam like a maniac all day long (I know, I'm hard to content :lol:).
Thus, I tried to look for ways to buff my FPS: I found some useful tips (like unchecking "load texture on demand", turning off "HDR" and "depth effect", keeping "instancing" and "auto-exposure" effect to still see shit IG; go http://strategywiki.org/wiki/Mount%26Blade/Configuration if you want some advice) and my FPS is now always around 40/80, with an "estimated performance" of 54% (was around 30% with my default configuration :mrgreen:).
My ping is always good (around 50/90, cable) and never had to buff it, so I think I'm lucky when I see players like Balton playing with 200+ (and he still find ways to go on a rampage).
Now I am at a loss when I see myself getting slaughtered by unseen weapon animation (or very late animation), cant block anything beside noob chambering (and sometimes it gets through :rolleyes:), and having my own weapon animation warp uncontrollably.
My request to you, ancient and experienced players, is the following : are there ways to counter such things from happening to me all the time, or is it a curse I will have to endure, like so many brothers in arms, for the rest of my playing time?
My thirst for kills is such that I have great difficulty to enjoy this situation.
Thanks in advance,
-
Sadly, the only solution is to...
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
And pray that TaleWorlds hasn't stopped patching M&BWB.
-
Just completely ignore graphics and drop settings as low as possible. 40-80 fps is one hell of a window and a big difference. With an estimated performance of 54% you will be fps-skipping/fps-lagging like fuck in massive fights, not to mention just standing around in sieges or 70+player maps. I play on settings I prefer due to being able to see easily (I have around 154% est. perf. and my fps still drops to 50s in massive siege fights for example). Turn off all shitty background apps, especially antivir if you use any.
Also 50-90 ping is a WAY too big a window for an aproximation, I see two options: Either you have way too huge jitter (Makes it terrible for playing. Basically, a consistent 100 is better than a shaky 60-90. Big jitter in general - your net sucks donkey cocks) or you like to adjust the numbers a bit to look better. Realistically for decent jitter it shouldnt go over 15-25, past that its noticably bad in the long term).
wat do?
First, dont lie about your fps/ping. Improve your cheaper pc parts (never, ever should you have under 80ish perf (rough estimation)) and/or get a new isp. Shit sucks brah but there is a huge advantage for people who have decent net and pcs. Still, unless your pc is from early 2ks you should be able to push at least a consistent 60. Remember that all fps past your monitor refresh rate is wasted, usual is 60 for lcds for example. Crpg has bad servers (4th ones are a bit better) in general, imo.
Adjust to your settings. Remember that vs laggy people with 200 ping you will still see odd stuff and notice they have lag armour.
Also, stop it with these unfunny image reactions. Its not tasteful, its not funny, its not classy, its childish. If you insist on using them on a forum at least use them sparingly.
-
Shaddap, Fraemi. You don't know what you're talking about.
I get these shitty animations with 40-50 ping and stable 120 fps.
And this is a lie. "Remember that all fps past your monitor refresh rate is wasted, usual is 60 for lcds for example."
-
I play with "28% perf", setting everything to maximum, and FPS don't even change by one when compared to minimum settings.
Usually, getting killed when you are out of range of someone (out of range on your pc, client side) just means the server has an hard time computing everything correctly, or someone near you (maybe yourself) is having bad ping, thus activating the congestion prevention mechanism and slowing down the rate of sending of the packets. Because your client is extrapolating positions when he doesn't get the server update, weird things can "happen" for you, but not on the server.
Having from time to time a bad ping yourself will likely cause those issues by itself, for you and others.
Just imagine you are fighting someone and when you loose the connexion, he is going backwards. Your client knows that guy is going backwards, he waits for the server to send new info about the enemy's direction and position, but doesn't get it. But he has to show you something so he starts from the assumption the enemy is still moving in the last direction he was moving. So you see the guy still going backwards, and you are now away from his range. Now let's say the packet arrives. The client syncs himself to the new information. Let's say in reality your enemy did not continued to go backwards, but forward then swing and killed you.
This is a rather extreme situation but can happen. In this case, you'll see the enemy teleporting and killing you in a flash (the client is running the game faster to catch the server time).
These sorts of issues aren't likely to be linked with graphic options or client computing load. 50-90 ping is perfectly playable, but might be laggy with congested servers
-
Shaddap, Fraemi. You don't know what you're talking about.
I get these shitty animations with 40-50 ping and stable 120 fps.
And this is a lie. "Remember that all fps past your monitor refresh rate is wasted, usual is 60 for lcds for example."
I get messed animations about once in a hundred and thats in high player amount servers which I usually avoid. I get 50-60 ping in average and I my fps is capped at refresh rate of monitor, that being a stable 75. Warband has a rather mediocre to poor netcode but its hardly that bad. Besides op is clearly lying or has some super outdated hardware and poor net.
That is not a "lie" because your monitor cant display more than that. Check your monitors refresh rate, that is the max amount of fps your monitor can actually output PER SECOND (aaand you know what fps is).
I withdraw my estimates about estimated performance, I used to play a couple of times on a friends crappy pc with low settings and I got around 80-90fps on lowest, est. perf. was >100%. Apparently that doesnt always hold true.
-
My monitor's refresh rate is 60, yet there is a MASSIVE difference between 60 and 100 fps. In any game. Everyone who knows their shit knows that you need 100+ fps for good performance, over 200 being optimal.
-
hurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
Anything in "reserve" is only useful if the game has "highs&downs" when more work is required from the pc or less, warband does this to a certain amount.
Oh, and most of all placebo.
-
Not placebo. Fact.
-
Not placebo. Fact.
Should have added one of your stupid image reactions with that.
Back
it
up
with
research
Up to now what you have said is
>it are so
>yes it is
-
Oh, you mean kinda like what you've done?
-
Oh, you mean kinda like what you've done?
What I say is derived from known research and common logic.
Since you say that is incorrect you are free to prove me wrong by putting up arguments rather than ideas without any backup.
Here, read these articles and then do a google search and read some of the top recommendations. Id suggest you to read a book but I highly doubt you have any relevant to the subject.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refresh_rate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_rate
-
Neither Wikipedia article helps your case. Quote the important parts if you think they do.
-
Neither Wikipedia article helps your case. Quote the important parts if you think they do.
If you need me to quote anything you fail at grasping both concepts.
-
Way to admit you're wrong, buddy ;)
-
Way to admit you're wrong, buddy ;)
You are the perfect example of why I usually choose not to post on most public forums.
There is always someone with little to no knowledge on the subject, unwilling to admit their mistakes, unable to comprehend concepts and worst of all a image reaction user on a forum.
Your e-cred means nothing when the discussion isnt even related to the game.
For what its worth you can keep thinking whatever you will, I dont care wether or not you choose remain ignorant and I really dont know why I posted in the first place since I was doomed to be swarmed with morons who hold myths as factual truth.
-
I am glad to hear that I keep slightly retarded people out of the forums that take what is written on Wikipedia as gospel without bothering to think more about it or that the subject matter may have more than one level of complexity. Thanks for playing, good sir.
-
You're both right.
if you have vsync on, anything above your monitor refresh rate will never show up on the screen.
you need to have vsync off, then you'll get see the difference, which can be a huge advantage if your pc manages to render 200 fps.
-
I am glad to hear that I keep slightly retarded people out of the forums that take what is written on Wikipedia as gospel without bothering to think more about it or that the subject matter may have more than one level of complexity. Thanks for playing, good sir.
Where did I once say that what is written on wiki is undoubtably correct? It includes entry level stuff for most all subjects, perfect for you.
If you care to use personal insults then I could refer to your discussion with Bane, your primitve understanding of things shines through.
oh and to play along
UMADUMADUMAD
-
Since you referred me to Wikipedia articles that only explain two different concepts, not how they interact with eachother. I am also pleased to announce that in fact I did not verily insult you, and even if I did, you STARTED IT!!! And I might just tell the internet teacher that.
You could refer me to my discussion with Bane but that wouldn't do much, because I am quite aware I had that discussion (although he didn't reply to my hypothesis about how I imagine group dynamics would've worked, but oh well.) Unless you want to pick up the subject and point out how my understanding of it is primitive, of course.
-
Since you referred me to Wikipedia articles that only explain two different concepts, not how they interact with eachother. I am also pleased to announce that in fact I did not verily insult you, and even if I did, you STARTED IT!!! And I might just tell the internet teacher that.
You could refer me to my discussion with Bane but that wouldn't do much, because I am quite aware I had that discussion (although he didn't reply to my hypothesis about how I imagine group dynamics would've worked, but oh well.) Unless you want to pick up the subject and point out how my understanding of it is primitive, of course.
I referred to wiki articles because they usually have some basic intro stuff. Once again: If you understand both concepts, you should have no problem seeing how they interact. Also, using "verily" automatically indicates that you are a my old friend that attempts to be classy.
Yes, bringing that up wont do much just like calling me a retard wont do. Id rather not begin discussing that subject with you because I do not care about you or what you think in the slightest.
-
You know, Fraemi, saying stuff like "If you understand both concepts, you should have no problem seeing how they interact" doesn't automagically make your point correct. I know how they interact, but you're trying to claim something different. Also, you verily fail.
Ahh, I see. :D Your attempt at insulting me has been noted, though you backed down too easily for it to be effective, old chap. Next time, try having a back-up plan if your bluff is called.
-
You know, Fraemi, saying stuff like "If you understand both concepts, you should have no problem seeing how they interact" doesn't automagically make your point correct. I know how they interact, but you're trying to claim something different. Also, you verily fail.
Ahh, I see. :D Your attempt at insulting me has been noted, though you backed down too easily for it to be effective, old chap. Next time, try having a back-up plan if your bluff is called.
It doesnt the claim automatically (very classy wordplay right there btw, bravo) correct if my claim cannot be logically deduced otherwise, however it can.
My attempt at insulting you was never meant to be taken seriously, only as a comparison to see how foolish you look when you do so and how irrelevant it is.
Also, calling you out on your frankly ideas that were on the level of a "brooding-outcast-15-yearold" (which might not be far from truth) is more efficent than calling someone a retard.
-
It doesnt the claim automatically (very classy wordplay right there btw, bravo) correct if my claim cannot be logically deduced otherwise, however it can.
My attempt at insulting you was never meant to be taken seriously, only as a comparison to see how foolish you look when you do so and how irrelevant it is.
Also, calling you out on your frankly ideas that were on the level of a "brooding-outcast-15-yearold" (which might not be far from truth) is more efficent than calling someone a retard.
Thankyou, I'm quite proud of it myself. Automagically, heh heh.
And, well, not really. See, you can call someone a retard just like that. But if you try to insult me like you did, then you'd actually have to, y'know, back it up. But when you're called on it, you back up with "oh i don't really care." So I would advice sticking to more common insults.
Hertz.
-
Thankyou, I'm quite proud of it myself. Automagically, heh heh.
And, well, not really. See, you can call someone a retard just like that. But if you try to insult me like you did, then you'd actually have to, y'know, back it up. But when you're called on it, you back up with "oh i don't really care." So I would advice sticking to more common insults.
Hertz.
Y'know, I cant bear myself to go through the ramblings that seem like put there by a person with seemingly little first hand knowledge about social interaction and little indepth understanding of it, Bane finely enough responded to you.
Also, I demand my awesome point back, scumbag.
-
I'm pleased with how this thread turned out, thank you guys.
Also, Fraemi did you actually read what you linked? :wink:
-
I'm pleased with how this thread turned out, thank you guys.
Also, Fraemi did you actually read what you linked? :wink:
Skimmed over it because I have studied it in uni. Note that I didnt say that those 2 were absolute.
-
I know no tweak that can give me a "consistent" FPS/ping, there is always up&down. Already tried to close every app and antivir before playing and it doesnt always help... Sometimes it clearly seems random.
I play with "28% perf", setting everything to maximum, and FPS don't even change by one when compared to minimum settings.
Having from time to time a bad ping yourself will likely cause those issues by itself, for you and others.
Im pretty close to your report about the ratio perf/FPS, but I really did see a difference after unchecking "load texture on demand".
And your post about ping/packet loss and such was a theory I was thinking out myself but I though under 100ping everything should be good. Might try to look at it with my ISP.
Apart ping and FPS problems, is there a link between the game itself and bad playing performance? Is there players with, say, 50 consistent ping and 100+FPS that experience this kind of weapon animation problem very often?
I'm pleased with how this thread turned out, thank you guys.
Same here :lol:
-
I know no tweak that can give me a "consistent" FPS/ping, there is always up&down. Already tried to close every app and antivir before playing and it doesnt always help... Sometimes it clearly seems random.
Im pretty close to your report about the ratio perf/FPS, but I really did see a difference after unchecking "load texture on demand".
And your post about ping/packet loss and such was a theory I was thinking out myself but I though under 100ping everything should be good. Might try to look at it with my ISP.
Apart ping and FPS problems, is there a link between the game itself and bad playing performance? Is there players with, say, 50 consistent ping and 100+FPS that experience this kind of weapon animation problem very often?
Same here :lol:
Ho yes, "load textures on demand", well I wasn't taking it to be part of graphic options (because it's not integrated in the "performance" estimation). It's needed for heavy mods, but not for cRPG, because the number of textures is roughly the same in Native, and it's multiplayer (you need good perf).
Concerning having issues with 50 "consistent" ping... well you can't call any ping as "consistent". If the server has to handle a big amount of number crunching in a short time window, things will allways go a little crazy. I had an average of 9 ping (and needless to say, extremely stable) when the EU4 server was located near Brussels, and still had "wtf how is that sword that long" problems. Less than now, but still from time to time. This wasn't related to my ping, but to the amount of people connected and their ping.
What server are you playing on ? Maybe the rig is a little to thin to handle many players.
-
In my Counter Strike Source times I learned that the frames per second should match refresh rate of the monitor or beeing a mulitplier of it.
e.g.: 60 Hz - 60 fps, 120 fps, 180 fps etc.
75 Hz - 75 fps, 150 fps, 225 fps etc.
I am playing with 60 Hz and 60 fps on high settings and I get 60 fps almost constantly, but honestly I have no idea if there is any noticeable impact..
-
I love lamp.
-
In my Counter Strike Source times I learned that the frames per second should match refresh rate of the monitor or beeing a mulitplier of it.
e.g.: 60 Hz - 60 fps, 120 fps, 180 fps etc.
75 Hz - 75 fps, 150 fps, 225 fps etc.
I am playing with 60 Hz and 60 fps on high settings and I get 60 fps almost constantly, but honestly I have no idea if there is any noticeable impact..
And in Quake based games (Quake (d'uh), Call of Duty) you should have FPS of 60, 125 or 333. 333 allowing you to jump the furthest and being VERY noticeably smoother than 125.
-
Kinda both right, if you can double the refresh rate of you're monitor then you'll see improvment, otherwise you can cause tearing and you should v-sync, unless you drop below you're montiors refresh rate in fps as this will cause you're framerate to be cut in half.
This argument don't really have much to do with the Op anyway,
Back on point, from what you posted i don't think theres much more you can do, i have issues like these too and i think its just more to do with the engine and netcode more then anything, just try make sure you have a constant fps.
-
Even with good fps and ping you get bad animations. It's the same issue as the missing textures thing. Most notably when archers shoot without animation. Sometimes it happens to melee too. Alt-tab to windows and back is only known cure.
-
Even with good fps and ping you get bad animations. It's the same issue as the missing textures thing. Most notably when archers shoot without animation. Sometimes it happens to melee too. Alt-tab to windows and back is only known cure.
Uuurgh, I hate it when archers stand still not even in front of me, then they shoot with the animation coming after. Why on earth does the first thing to be sent on the net is the shot arrow... With those kinds of priorities, I think it's beneficial to use a lagswitch as archer...