Lag while hosting

[LAW Soldier fd]

So, this past week we've had some cool multiplayer games. With the DSL, I've hosted succesfully games with up to 12 people simultaneously online.

Ping-times are within limits, everything seems fine..

except my framerate. It's 2-4. My mouse is jumpy, it's impossible to target anyone, or even dream about hitting someone who's on the move (well, crawling maybe) ..

Then I joined an MP game with 10 people, on a different server, and BOOM, framerate back to normal.

That's why I'm trying to get a dedicated serv up.. so I could actually enjoy the games I'm honored to be hosting.

Anyone else have this problem, or should I dig?

-fd

[LAW Soldier fd]

Sorry, completely forgot:

AMD tb 1.4ghz
512mem
geforce2, 32mb mem
win2000
newest detonators, via4in1 installed

odd. :P

(Edit: sorry about my word usage, I meant to say SDSL 2.3megs both up/down stream, but didn't know I was gonna get s**it from people when using just the word DSL)

I get about 241k/sec both up and down.


(Edited by LAW Soldier fd at 12:19 am on Oct. 22, 2001)

[Dawdler]

DSL with 12 ppl as host is to little, even if you would have a 5ghz computer. Dont even try.

[RN Malboeuf]

12 ppl my A$$
DSL lol

your limit is 6-8 before players will see lag
and don't even try and tell us that we're wrong http://www.flashpoint1985.com/ikonboard3/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

as for your hosting, you may have a fast dload rate but poor upload rate (like DUH DSL Dam Slow Line)
don't bother hosting past 6 or 8

[MajHavoc]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from RN Malboeuf on 12:54 pm on Oct. 21, 2001
12 ppl my A$$
DSL lol

your limit is 6-8 before players will see lag
and don't even try and tell us that we're wrong http://www.flashpoint1985.com/ikonboard3/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

as for your hosting, you may have a fast dload rate but poor upload rate (like DUH DSL Dam Slow Line)
don't bother hosting past 6 or 8
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

Outa curiosity, Mal, what type of connection are you recommending?

Cable does not have the upstream capability that DSL does (Which is a MUST to host or run a dedi server on ANY OLG, as you already know). Buddies of mine that use cable get hellatious downstream speeds (Great for client gaming) and the up stream is locked at 64kb or 128k max depending on the traffic on thier node and the time of day.

I do network tech support for a living on Cisco products and have friends on the same campus that support ATT Broadband, so I am not unfamiliar with the technology of both.

I've extensivley tested my dsl connection my upstream is between 256 and 272k consistantly and downtream speed is between 640 and 720 consistantly. I pay for 640d/272u CIR (commited information rate). DSL out performs Cable big-time as a server running as host for ANY game, some better than most.

Are you saying we need a T1 or better to host OFP with 10-12 peeps?

So far my exp. with OFP I've played and hosted, is (as much or more) about CPU speed, Memory, and Vid Card.

BTW, this is'nt intended as a flame, I just want to make sure I understand the point you are trying to make. Seems to me that with everyone trying to play/host OFP, the info we find here is valuable, at least until BIS release a definative FAQ dealing with Multi-player.

/0

Maj

(Edited by MajHavoc at 3:59 pm on Oct. 21, 2001)

[RN Malboeuf]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Cable does not have the upstream capability that DSL does (Which is a MUST to host or run a dedi server on ANY OLG, as you already know). [/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
lol
that made me laugh
<a href="http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard/topic.cgi?forum=3&topic=458

" target="_blank">http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin....=458

</a>
DSL does NOT have better upstream then cable, simply based on it's technoligy
it's more stable then Cable yes, but Cable on average is 80% faster then DSL

Some Cable in LARGE cities does get terribly slow after 5pm, they share a T3 or Fiber line and have 10-30+ ppl (called a node)
I'm lucky I have only 1 person on my node and have a T1 at my command 1700/150+ I'm capped at 150kbs wich is still 3 times faster then DSL which averages 50kbs upstream
Now on my two T3 lines at work, I'm capped at 1000kb upstream
I get my new puter monday finally and this 800 is becomming a ded server at work

In the end if you live a a large city get SDSL if you can, it's twice+ as faster then ADSL

the CTRC here in canada limit what we can have 2000/200 for resitential users even though DSL/cable modems can reach 8-12 meg, but we would crash the net lol

as for you 250+ upstream it is possible, but it's also VERY rare for 95% of DSL users

ppl who abuse (servers like hotline ect.) that upstream in canada get limited upstreams of 20kbs, I've seen many even lower

for 10+ peps refer to the link I posted above

no flames intended (cept at DSL heh)

[LAW Soldier fd]

DSL? .. SDSL 2320/2320, 241kb/s both ways.

When I run the dedicated server, it runs like a peach, noone complains about lag then.

[Mister Frag]

RN Malboeuf, what makes you say that DSL averages 50kbs upstream? That would be only slightly better than analog modems can do.

Go to DSLReports.com (http://www.dslreports.com) and take a look at the throughput people get -- it works both for US and Canadian service providers.

The vast majority of the people getting double-digit upload speeds are ones with problems or wireless access -- both cable and DSL exceed 100Kb up routinely. Take a look at the Speed Test Results Archive (http://www.dslreports.com/archive).

I have 1500/384 DSL myself, BTW.

[LAW Soldier fd]

*bump*

I'd really love to know if there's hope, or is one forced to invest in another 1.4ghz amd machine. sounds expensive, when there's dozens of MP games out there that can host 32 without breaking a sweat.

and i happen to like ofp " a lo' ".

[2XS]

only for the info, theres many different sorts of DSL with ADSL and SDSL most popular.

the only reason why DSL is thought to be slower is simply because your isp limited the rates for up/downstream

ADSL can go up to 4 Mbit per second full duplex (up and downstream)
and SDSL can go up to 8 Mbit per second full duplex.

the good thing on DSL is, its a dedicated line, you dont have to share the bandwith and if your isp is using the right technologie (Fast path instead of interleaving) it has a far better responce time (ping) than cable.

2x

[LAW Soldier fd]

It's not the network bandwidth I'm worried about, like said, when I'm running a dediserver on the same machine that gets stuck while hosting a "big" game, noone complains about anything.

But when I'm hosting a game thru the multiplayer menu, my framerate is eaten alive. Does updating positions and happenings to clients really eat that much CPU?

Ah well.

[Thundercok]

LAW,

When you host and run a game you bog as the host. You handle too much. It has nothing to do with the internet connect speed, but it is related to the number of people joining.

I have a great system and have 3 join me on LAN and my system bogs, while the folks next to me have no problem.

Hosting as a server and client is like most games that run that way(Swat3, Rogue Spear), you can only take 3 to 4 players until your own system is overworked.

[LAW Soldier fd]

This is what I've been witnessing, just thought there'd be some magic "workaround", coz we all know that there are games that don't bog with multiple clients aboard.

But then again, a dedicated server would be rock cool wouldn't it? ;) ..

just seems like a waste o money to buy FPS after getting the 1400mhz and a geforce2 along with it :P hoped that the need for update / extra acquisitions wouldn't come anytime soon, but here we are. :)

[Thundercok]

But relative to the best multi game engine(s) out there, Carmacks Quakes/Half-Life/Counterstrike, none of those can run a good co-op game with AI when you are hosting and playing at the same time.

I guess the difference is that Carmacks ded servers can handle many more players, but that is with no AI. AI adds a lot to overhead.

I love co-op, and that is all we play, but I don't expect more than 3-4 players on a host/client peer-to-peer.

That doesn't mean I would not like to see a few more. http://www.flashpoint1985.com/ikonboard3/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif In our games we have had very consistent play with 3 always, and 4 humans is 50-50.

(Edited by Thundercok at 7:49 am on Oct. 24, 2001)

[Mister Frag]

I've got a dual PIII-800 / GeForce2 GTS / 512MB of PC100 RAM / Windows 2000 / 1.5/384 DSL, and I host using the non-dedicated server for four or five people, no slowdown.

And we use the built-in voice communications as well...

[Skal]

Well, some of the guys have focused on the network speed,and forgotten a bot the CPU... since we have stats on the ded. server, I can tell you that you really need a CPU to handle the IAs... for 'big' coops, the network use is about 15kb per player upstream... so a 256kb upstream line is enough to handle... but in the same time, you need to move your IAs if you don't want them to simply be stuck in place... my own ded. is a little one, only a PIII 825, and many 'big' coops are too much for it... even on one of my friends' ded. (an athlon 1.4) some 'big' coops take the whole CPU to run... this is quite easy to see that, 'cause BIS put a cap on the FPS for the server, when you ask the stats, the first number (FPS) is caped at 50... if you have 50, the CPU is fine, when below, the CPU is full... the lower the worse, for sure !! http://www.flashpoint1985.com/ikonboard3/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

I've forgotten to mention that both my friend and I are running the ded. on real multitask system, w2k and not w98...

to give a real answer to LAWSold., yes ! the ded. will help you greatly... your own computer is not enough to handle both IAs, you as a player and the overall network communications...

C U :cool:

[Mister Frag]

Skal, I've been wondering what the new information accessed by pressing 'P' is -- where did you see that the first number if the FPS?

I'm not doubting you, I was just wondering if there's a document that provides a detailed explanation of what is shown on the screen.

[Skal]

Well, that's not an info on the 'P' screen, that's an info given only when using a ded. server...

on a ded. server, when admin, you may type the #monitor command, which gives infos about the server's load... CPU, memory, network upstream and downstream... that's all... this made me see that the lag is more often due to CPU lag on the server, than real network lag... specially on my own little ded. server... ("little" CPU)

C U :cool:

[RN Malboeuf]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from Mister Frag on 10:38 pm on Oct. 21, 2001
RN Malboeuf, what makes you say that DSL averages 50kbs upstream? That would be only slightly better than analog modems can do.


Go to DSLReports.com (http://www.dslreports.com) and take a look at the throughput people get -- it works both for US and Canadian service providers.

The vast majority of the people getting double-digit upload speeds are ones with problems or wireless access -- both cable and DSL exceed 100Kb up routinely. Take a look at the Speed Test Results Archive (http://www.dslreports.com/archive).

I have 1500/384 DSL myself, BTW.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

Anilog modems (56k) can handle 1.3- 5.6k (some up to 16k) up stream, no 56k in the world can reach 50k

I have DLS Reports and 4 others
in Canada CRTC restricts Resiental use, now even though they restrict us, Canadian UP streams have been higher then USA

when you read my link on speed you have to see I add "+" to certain DSL and Cable speeds I posted that it's possible, I never said it was not impossible

When I say on average I say that about every one in the states and canada, average users don't use DSLreprts, they dont care or know about it speed, they think it's (their DSL/Cable)  fast and that's it

there are 100,000's  more ppl with low end DSL then higher SDSL

not to many gamers I know have SDSL


(Edited by RN Malboeuf at 8:48 pm on Oct. 24, 2001)

[RN Malboeuf]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from LAW Soldier fd on 5:36 pm on Oct. 21, 2001
DSL? .. SDSL 2320/2320, 241kb/s both ways.

When I run the dedicated server, it runs like a peach, noone complains about lag then.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

As I said in my post SDSL is faster then DSL

[RN Malboeuf]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from 2XS on 9:00 pm on Oct. 23, 2001
only for the info, theres many different sorts of DSL with ADSL and SDSL most popular.

the only reason why DSL is thought to be slower is simply because your isp limited the rates for up/downstream

ADSL can go up to 4 Mbit per second full duplex (up and downstream)
and SDSL can go up to 8 Mbit per second full duplex.

the good thing on DSL is, its a dedicated line, you dont have to share the bandwith and if your isp is using the right technologie (Fast path instead of interleaving) it has a far better responce time (ping) than cable.

2x

[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

DSL can reach 8mbit
bit no one will enable it
they believe it will over load the NODES if more then 10% Broad Ban users in one area have 4-8 mbit conections

Right now as we speak a Toronto Company is working on a Optical Light switch Node that will speed up nodes by 500%+

even then it wont hadle 50% of the users running at 4-8 Mbut conections

just because DSL and reachs 8 mbits (my cable is rated 13+ mbits if we wanted) does not mean you'll ever see it in your life time

[RN Malboeuf]

getting back to CO-OP I have my 1st mission built for 12 player Co-op with 5 bases to attack and detsroy, lost of AI and tanks
the MP players get 2 choppers and 3 hummers to chose from for attack styles

it's a hog, and should be run on a higher end server which we have

1.4@<hidden> gigs AMD (A7V266)
128 PC2100@<hidden> DDR
T3

[LAW Soldier fd]

I'd suggest getting more RAM .. 128megs is not that much anymore, even if it's DDR.

I remember someone telling me that a moderate-size game (5-10 clients), depending on the mission, would eat about 90 megs of RAM, and if you count in Win2000, it's getting tight in there.

And with the v1.27, seems like the dediservers hog memory and won't release it, someone complained that in two days from starting it, a dedi would be eating up as much as 300 megs of memory alltho there was noone playing at that given moment he looked up mem usage.

(Edit: sorry, he was talking about v1.26b, just looked it up, v1.27 seems "ok" with mem usage)

I'm going to build a win-dedi as soon as christmas is done with, thought of an amd 1.4g with 512mem. that should do it.

-fd

(Edited by LAW Soldier fd at 5:31 am on Oct. 25, 2001)