Jump to content
Ericson38

anyone using satellite based internet service?

14 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
699 posts
10,484 battles

Just moved to ultra rural location, only offered satellite based internet (all that is available), namely Hughes Net. Anyone able to play the game, or tried, using sat based connection ?

I played a BOT Iowa against mine in the training room, but don't want to go pink trying to get into battle.

 

Edited by Ericson38

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,198
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,596 posts
9,000 battles

The ping is going to be absolutely horrid, 300 - 500 at a guess if not worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
229
[SYN]
Members
345 posts
6,156 battles

I’ve never used a worse service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
286
[PLPT]
Members
632 posts
6,808 battles

Yes, what BrushWolf said.  You will experience high latency which is terrible for games.  On the flip side, World of Warships is one of the most forgiving games in terms of latency, especially if you're a BB player.  Avoid any situations where you need the "twitch factor"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,494 posts
5,479 battles
5 hours ago, Ericson38 said:

Just moved to ultra rural location, only offered satellite based internet (all that is available), namely Hughes Net. Anyone able to play the game, or tried, using sat based connection ?

I played a BOT Iowa against mine in the training room, but don't want to go pink trying to get into battle.

 

Your area doesn't even offer DSL at all ??.  House has a phone line I would imagine right?

Edited by dionkraft

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
896
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
2,253 posts
8,578 battles

Don't use satellite, but I have used cellular (4G) on occasion, and it isn't so bad. I believe @Kapitan_Wuff might be using satellite regularly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,679
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
6,833 posts
11,533 battles

I don't use satellite, or at least not in the way a service like Hughesnet works.  I don't know if the speeds are capable or not, just that they are greedy as [edited] and their data gets expensive quick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
699 posts
10,484 battles

I guess I could open a ticket and give a heads up to tech support that I might turn pink immediately after not playing for a few months. Hughes is OK on download speed, once you get past the delay (latency). No phone line here, but cell coverage is OK if you stay close to the rear deck. On the plus side of things, I can see boats at anchor from where I'm typing this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
79
[FACT]
Members
523 posts
5,850 battles
10 hours ago, MikeLWX said:

I’ve never used a worse service.

Have also tried it. Ping/latency is bad. Often up to 2seconds delay btwn your input command and command reaction. Expensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
31 posts
4,292 battles
10 hours ago, dionkraft said:

Your area doesn't even offer DSL at all ??.  House has a phone line I would imagine right?

This is funny, only because I thought there can't be anywhere in the US that doesn't have some form of broadband until I moved to a small town on the edge of the Adirondacks in NY a couple years ago.  We had land lines but they did not have the capability of running DSL on them.

I tried Satellite then for gaming as I was heavily into Everquest 2, but as it has been said the latency is absolutely horrible for gaming.  There is a very noticeable delay when you click on a button, before it will even go down as activated.  Another thing to watch for with it, Hughes, especially is even though their download speeds aren't bad once you hit your data mark they seriously choke your speed.  On top of that it is a rolling 30 day time frame before you get your speed back, so basically you can't download anything at all during that time or the 30 day mark keeps renewing holding you right up against the threshold.

The solution I had was I actually using my cell phone as a hot spot and played through it, you will not use much data to just play the game I could go a whole month of playing 10-12 hour days without ever hitting my 10 GB cap.  Any updates though will slice big time into that pool.

Edited by Drachost

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
104
[C-1]
[C-1]
Members
358 posts
6,764 battles

Hey there Eric, I play using a Satellite connection with Hughes net. Minimum you are looking at 350ms ping. Maximum will be some spikes upwards to 1,000ms but they are rare. On worse occasions you can reach upwards to 2,500ms <far more rare but it does happen.

 

Tip: Plan your actions 1 whole second in advance and calculate the latency with your shots. <Basically aim ahead just a bit more than you normally would XD

 

BB's are easy to work with, cruisers with spam cannons do good, and DD's are still manageable... though the US DD's might have you aiming at a target off screen. You also don't want to get into any knife fights in a DD. I've missed so many friggin pointblank torp shots that I could throw this screen out the window. Play smart and try not to get surprised. <You'll be the last to know if you get spotted lol.

 

If it's too much to deal with, they have "MiFi" portable wifi things that you can try. Better latency if you have a tower or something nearby but damn thing costs $100 for 10gb.

 

Oh, to add more details. I've used up all my data this month XD Trust me, you can still play. It's not the same as having a direct connection, but out of all the games online Wows is the most forgiving. You shouldn't have to worry about being disconnected. Sometimes this thing goes screwy and I end up with connections flying around -35 to 2,500ms. <Don't really know what causes it but it is so rare that I don't often bother with it. But, as rare as those crazy -35 - 2500 events are, it's even rarer to actually have been disconnected during it. Recently, I've not had any problems with outright disconnections.

 

Edited by Levits

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,494 posts
5,479 battles

There is talk about NEW Sats's being launched which will be very fast than the present ones which in some ways may threaten land based  ISP providers and the like. Not there yet but supposedly..we will see! 

Space_X just launched and heres some interesting details on their LOW ORBIT SYSTEM:

Here’s what you need to know about Starlink, and where it sits in the satellite-broadband scene.

Is satellite broadband new?

Not at all. The first satellite built for two-way broadband communications—e-BIRD, built by Boeing (BA, +1.84%) for the French-headquartered Eutelsat—went up some 15 years ago. There have been many more since. However, so far it’s a relatively niche market.

The advantage of satellite-based broadband is that it can cover entire regions without the need to build out expensive land-based internet infrastructure—you just need a satellite dish to use it, which makes it good for serving rural areas. And while it started out pretty slow, it’s gotten a lot faster over the years (though it’s still not in the same league as a decent fiber connection).

There are two big disadvantages, though (apart from interruptions due to cloud cover). The first is that it tends to be pretty expensive, and the second is that it usually suffers from high latency, because of how high the satellites are.

Latency is the time it takes for a signal to get from one place to another. While it’s not a big issue when you’re sending emails or trying to view a static webpage, high latency can be a showstopper for video, virtual reality, and real-time communications.

So what’s SpaceX doing that’s different?

SpaceX’s idea is to put its satellites into much lower orbit than usual, in order to cut the latency of the services. A typical internet satellite in geostationary orbit is more than 22,000 miles above ground. According to SpaceX’s FCC filings, the company wants to put its Starlink satellites in low Earth orbit, between 684 and 823 miles in the air.

The issue there, of course, is that bringing the satellites closer to the ground means each satellite can only cover a much smaller patch of territory than would otherwise be possible. So in order to provide competitive coverage, SpaceX will need a lot of satellites that all talk to one another.

And that’s the plan. Elon Musk’s company wants to initially deploy 800 satellites in low Earth orbit, in order to cover “initial U.S. and international coverage.” Then it wants to throw over 7,000 more into the sky at “Very Low Earth Orbit” (VLEO, in this case around 211 miles up) to fill in the blanks as needed.

That sounds… expensive?

Sure, but less so if you’re in the business of launching stuff already—this week’s planned launch is a case in point, with SpaceX’s Microsat 2a and 2b satellites tucked in there alongside Spain’s Paz satellite. And don’t forget that SpaceX’s biggest innovation is being able to reuse its rockets.

SpaceX has already become adept at recovering and reusing the first stage (the body) of its Falcon 9 rockets, and it’s hoping to become as successful at recovering the fairing (the bit at the top, which contains the payload being sent into orbit). To do this, it’s built a giant net with the delightful name of “Mr. Steven.”

Indeed, SpaceX seems to want Starlink to be its big money-spinner, ultimately financing Musk’s Martian ambitions. The company’s launches operate on thin margins—a successful Internet business would bring in a lot more cash.

And what are the challenges?

Apart from the numerous technical challenges that SpaceX faces, it’s also annoyed communications satellite operators such as OneWeb, which are worried that SpaceX’s vast planned constellation will pose a physical threat to their own satellites in low Earth orbit (which are generally used for voice communications).

SpaceX has countered that its plans include plenty of space between satellites—at least 31 miles—and that it will also be developing “ongoing innovations” to reduce the risk of bringing its satellites down, once they reach the ends of their working lives.

The company seems likely to get its way, albeit slowly. Earlier this month, Federal Communications Commission (FCC) chair Ajit Pai said he was in favor of approving SpaceX’s application to operate its constellation. However, other bodies—notably the International Telecommunication Union—also need to give the green light. It will be some years before SpaceX’s service is fully operational.

The other big challenge is competition. OneWeb, Telesat, and Space Norway have also received the FCC’s go-ahead for similar (if not quite so ambitious) satellite plans. Then there are rival plans that aren’t based on satellites, such as X’s (formerly Google X’s) Project Loon.

And let’s not forget good old mobile broadband. While some experts are skeptical about the practicalities, one big promise of the looming “5G” cellular technology is that it will be able to provide broadband services to rural areas that don’t currently get good fixed-line services.

There are plenty of competitors out there for Musk’s scheme. But that said, the others don’t have Mars on their roadmap.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
699 posts
10,484 battles

In  the training room against one BOT on the ocean map I was seeing in the 320-340 ms ping range. This is one against one, so I'm thinking that maybe it won't be much worse in battle, since the data rate itself is pretty good. I was noting about 1/3 second from time from left mouse button click to fire main KGV guns at the BOT.

I wonder what the amount of data exchanged (to and from WG server) is for a typical 20 minute game. More for a DD player, but curious what the amount can range to for a BB.

Has anyone characterized this ?

Then I need to call Hughes and ask them about my plan......

 

Edited by Ericson38

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
104
[C-1]
[C-1]
Members
358 posts
6,764 battles
7 hours ago, Ericson38 said:

In  the training room against one BOT on the ocean map I was seeing in the 320-340 ms ping range. This is one against one, so I'm thinking that maybe it won't be much worse in battle, since the data rate itself is pretty good. I was noting about 1/3 second from time from left mouse button click to fire main KGV guns at the BOT.

I wonder what the amount of data exchanged (to and from WG server) is for a typical 20 minute game. More for a DD player, but curious what the amount can range to for a BB.

Has anyone characterized this ?

Then I need to call Hughes and ask them about my plan......

 

You can expect roughly 1gb of data per month while playing. But of course, it does depend on how much/long you play. I've been on for a few hours most of the days this month and I'm at around 900mb of data used.

Obviously the updates and regular browsing is going to eat through your data far faster than anything else; and streaming anything for that matter. But the game isn't that taxing on your data allowance. <Even better, there isn't really much of a difference between playing with your data allowance or playing with the reduced speed.

I ran out of data halfway through the month, I'm not blazing through the internet at the speed of light, but I can still watch videos at 360p just fine and WOWS still plays the same (Seems to have a few more dodgy connection moments than usual running with the reduced speeds, but those are again "rare"). I would not advise playing any online game with this connection if you have alternatives, but you can do it.

All I can advise when playing with a satellite connection is that you plan ahead more than others. Don't get into a situation where you have to rely on your reflexes.

 

As for any differences in "range"... not sure what you mean there. There is no difference at all between them. In terms of data moving to and fro. A 20 minute game probably only counts for about a few megabytes (I'd hazard to guess around 10-30?mb maybe... never really counted). But I believe that the ship models are on your computer. The only thing being transferred are positions and key presses.

Edited by Levits

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×