Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
guns_at_last_light

Could desync be impacting other mechanics?

30 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
747 posts

In light of WG investigating potential issues with displayed ship positions relative to where shells impact (e.g. "desync"),  I was curious as to whether this could be affecting other game mechanics. Specifically, can we trust the displayed position of incoming fire, or are shells and torps really hurtling toward a different spot on screen? Essentially, it's the flipside of the issue brought to WG's attention.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,819
[WORX]
Members
10,766 posts
18,591 battles

Nope. From what I seen from Flamu's video, its only shells being fired not shells damaging you.

If it was a "major" issue, WG would've corrected it with a hot fix... As of right now, its a drag your slippers response which if you ask me, its a "minor" issue.

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
662
[CAST]
[CAST]
Members
2,609 posts
10,459 battles

I think it is affecting incoming as well as outgoing.  It's all shots vs ships rendering that seem to be affected.  If you are shooting at a ship, it is behind where you think it is, so you have to lead a bit farther than normal to get a successful hit.  If a shot or torp is coming in, it can also appear to be farther back than it really is.  You can dodge and shots or torps will appear to miss, but you will take damage because the shot actually connected where your ship used to be when the shot actually hit, not where it appeared to be when the shot visually hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,283
[ALL41]
Beta Testers
2,180 posts
9,446 battles

They could also go back and look at Yamato's dispersion because ever since Musashi was introduced it has not had the accuracy it used to have. Its irrelevant its sigma hasn't changed, SOMETHING did because the ship the very day of the patch begun to show its borked accuracy...and NA and EU servers had dozens of posts up about it for months. 

If they changed something to musashi guns to make them different from yamato then something along the way got borked in Yamato's gun code. It makes no sense that a ship that used to reliably citadel other BBs at very long ranges and land very tight shot spreads suddenly has said salvos landing short and long so much it barely lands a single hit and its rarely a citadel. It makes no sense a ship that was considered lethal beyond 18kms was turned into a joke up to 18kms and mostly harmless beyond it. 

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,275
[WOLF5]
Supertester
4,138 posts
4,090 battles
4 minutes ago, Skyfaller said:

They could also go back and look at Yamato's dispersion because ever since Musashi was introduced it has not had the accuracy it used to have. Its irrelevant its sigma hasn't changed, SOMETHING did because the ship the very day of the patch begun to show its borked accuracy...and NA and EU servers had dozens of posts up about it for months. 

If they changed something to musashi guns to make them different from yamato then something along the way got borked in Yamato's gun code. It makes no sense that a ship that used to reliably citadel other BBs at very long ranges and land very tight shot spreads suddenly has said salvos landing short and long so much it barely lands a single hit and its rarely a citadel. It makes no sense a ship that was considered lethal beyond 18kms was turned into a joke up to 18kms and mostly harmless beyond it. 

Yeah, cause adding a completely different ship changed something about Yamato...

Seriously, people were on a kick about MO dispersion nerf for months before someone did the leg work and disproved it. Why do people insist WG makes stealth nerfs when there's all the evidence to the contrary? 

39 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said:

Nope. From what I seen from Flamu's video, its only shells being fired not shells damaging you.

If it was a "major" issue, WG would've corrected it with a hot fix... As of right now, its a drag your slippers response which if you ask me, its a "minor" issue.

What do you count as a "major" issue if ships not rendering properly isn't?

And it does affect incoming ordnance, bombs. And I would imagine incoming is affected as well, no reason it wouldn't. I have noticed a higher number of torps not exactly where they're displayed lately as well. I think they have a problem with client/server talking to one another.

As to why they're dragging their feet, well the coronavirus isn't helping I'm sure. And it could be partly caused by high server load right now. Also, if it's a desync issue it's probably at least partially network related, which makes it much harder to track down, as it's partly condition dependent and so not 100% reliable. And also not just a coding fix. There may be hardware issues as well. So the fact that they're moving slowly doesn't mean it's minor, it just indicates it's tricky to fix. I find it hard to believe they didn't know of this issue earlier, they just chose not to talk about it while they worked to figure out the issue. And I wouldn't bet on it being resolved quickly, remember how long it took them to fix the delay in ship rendering?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,819
[WORX]
Members
10,766 posts
18,591 battles
10 minutes ago, AJTP89 said:

What do you count as a "major" issue if ships not rendering properly isn't?

And it does affect incoming ordnance, bombs. And I would imagine incoming is affected as well, no reason it wouldn't. I have noticed a higher number of torps not exactly where they're displayed lately as well. I think they have a problem with client/server talking to one another.

According to Flamu, you're wrong...  His score was affected not the players who shot at him... That is what he showed and WG agrees... According to WG, they will drag their feet as other priorities take precedence... For example

  • ordnance timer bug (over a min is counted twice...since 0.9.0) 

Until I see the changes in the patch notes coming up or a hot fix... This will take upto 5 patches to change...

Edited by Navalpride33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,988 posts
36,790 battles

Actually, it's affecting everything across the board. Because if what you see is 4 secs ago then you can't shoot at it effectively.

I have had the shells missing incidents, I had AP bombs completely miss and fall outside the dispersion oval. I had torps fired at a target sailing straight and they missed by about, you guessed it, 4 secs.

If you remember the episode of Star Trek TNG where the USS Stargazer executed the Picard maneuver. The maneuver consists of warping to a short distance in front of a ship to throw off their targeting systems. Because it's faster than light, the delay made the Stargazer appear in two places at once z but point A was where it was. Point B is the true location. But the perception presents the attacker from seeing the B point until too late.

Any delay from what you see and the true position is bad.

Well called that lag back in the day.

But I am classically trained in the Atari Era. So I guess I play a few games. :cap_cool:

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
326
[SIMP]
Members
1,304 posts
10,775 battles
39 minutes ago, AJTP89 said:

Yeah, cause adding a completely different ship changed something about Yamato...

Seriously, people were on a kick about MO dispersion nerf for months before someone did the leg work and disproved it. Why do people insist WG makes stealth nerfs when there's all the evidence to the contrary? 

Yeah, WeeGee would never do something like a simple visual fix/change and stealth nerf armour...

Wait...

They did that didnt they!! What ship was that? oh yeah -  YA-MA-TOOOOO!

How about German destroyers?

How about the Warspite?

There are others arent there?

  • Cool 1
  • Confused 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,662
[WOLF3]
Members
27,112 posts
23,873 battles

MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMmmmmmmmmmmmmmm this is going to be great, just like the "WG nurfed muh Missouri dispersion" days.

 

It's going to get lively and for me, it's going to get absolutely hilarious.

 

People are always eager to pin their failures on an external factor.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,936
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
14,133 posts
19,239 battles
2 hours ago, Navalpride33 said:

If it was a "major" issue, WG would've corrected it with a hot fix...

Hilarious! Absolutely Hilarious!! (Would they be assigning that job to Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny?)

1 hour ago, clammboy said:

Oh boy . 

Yippie eye oh kai yay buckeroo!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,275
[WOLF5]
Supertester
4,138 posts
4,090 battles
36 minutes ago, _cthulhu_ said:

Yeah, WeeGee would never do something like a simple visual fix/change and stealth nerf armour...

Wait...

They did that didnt they!! What ship was that? oh yeah -  YA-MA-TOOOOO!

How about German destroyers?

How about the Warspite?

There are others arent there?

Wut?

When and how did WG ever nerf (or even change) a ship without announcing it ahead of time?

Yamato's armor scheme has never changed.

Warspite had an armor bug, which WG announced they were going to fix (that was a LONG time ago)

German DDs? The stealth fire thing? That was just bad communication on WG's part.

 

I don't know what the hell your talking about, but I guess it's easier to come up with conspiracy theories than actually read patch notes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
578
[WOLF5]
[WOLF5]
Members
868 posts
2,737 battles
59 minutes ago, SteelRain_Rifleman said:

Well called that lag back in the day.

Funny how latency and lag have become "desync".  Network knowledge is becoming a magic dark art these days :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[DRFTR]
Beta Testers
2,138 posts

in the replay posted this evening it sure doesn't look like network lag when shells are passing through a stationary target....   maybe packet loss... but certainly not lag.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,966
[GWG]
Members
6,969 posts
13,503 battles

This thread is rather entertaining.

The TROLLS are very apparent...   And they say, "THERE IS NO PROBLEM...  GET GOODER !!".
Pay no attention to them.  I've come to find out it has more to do with where you live in relation to major network access hubs and routing.
And unless you want to pack up and move to another state...   life sucks.

Watching videos (not WOWS related), I see times when it gets jumpy and even stops for a couple seconds....  and I have a hard link - so that's the Internet Service Provider -- that I can't change.  I'd have to move.

I also notice where some of the better players mention they live in their streams and researched those couple bits...   Silicon Valley, near major metropolis hubs...  
These folks have a distinct advantage in these games.  They won't see the lag, desync, or delay position that those of us in the 'sticks' have to endure.  They have enough bandwidth to stream video.
They shoot and hit citadels.  We shoot and hit water.

I can't see any fix for this.  It's just the state of the Internet in how it exists right now.  If, like me, you live out in the boonies...  Just get used to lowered expectations.
If you fire on a full broadside ship that just ran into an island, you need to wait an extra moment for the data to interchange before pulling the trigger.  It's NOT real time.

What I'm saying is that in order to 'Get Gooder', we need to step back from the simulation and see what is going on based on where our computer connects, and how much a data 'surge' can clobber our play.

Better off sticking with Co-Op if it gets real bad in these days.

Edited by AVR_Project
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
332
[NWOC]
[NWOC]
Members
1,016 posts
12,344 battles
1 hour ago, SteelRain_Rifleman said:

Actually, it's affecting everything across the board. Because if what you see is 4 secs ago then you can't shoot at it effectively.

I have had the shells missing incidents, I had AP bombs completely miss and fall outside the dispersion oval. I had torps fired at a target sailing straight and they missed by about, you guessed it, 4 secs.

If you remember the episode of Star Trek TNG where the USS Stargazer executed the Picard maneuver. The maneuver consists of warping to a short distance in front of a ship to throw off their targeting systems. Because it's faster than light, the delay made the Stargazer appear in two places at once z but point A was where it was. Point B is the true location. But the perception presents the attacker from seeing the B point until too late.

Any delay from what you see and the true position is bad.

Well called that lag back in the day.

But I am classically trained in the Atari Era. So I guess I play a few games. :cap_cool:

 

 

I have seen this happening a fair amount lately, as well as the arty going right thru' a boat, also there have been a lot of comments from other clan members, in-game discord, about this. In my case, as I live in a third world country (OCONUS, on contract in s.africa), I have put it down to net overload and the fact that I always have lag. On the lag, I have pretty much figured out how to compensate for it, and no way feel it is a fault at WG. 

I am not, even by the mad hatters standard, computer tech literate (or just plain computer literate, [it's a hamster 'thing']),so I accepted the errors as being mine. As it seems this is not the case, then WG needs to do a 'Hot Fix' asap.

A very genuine Tnx to y'all for the 'Tech. education.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,988 posts
36,790 battles

If you live in a high bandwidth area, I would like to hear the opinions about this.

As for ultra competitive players not seeing a problem, well you have to actually log in and play first. Then offer an opinion. Since Randoms has become a Black hole of PR plunge into the depths of the Marianas trench for some players. Most " elitist" ones refuse to play.

If WG has a problem, they will fix it. But it really cracks me up when purple ones refuse to play because the mood is not right (cough, cough, syncdrop failure).

No. High tech sector gets all the nice bandwidth, but it's easy to get it too.

It's called asking your cousin to write a complaint to FCC and throttle the crap out of all the bandwidth and competitive gaming will die. You can also get the business version of ISP easy where I live. But I don't have to. I have great bandwidth.

Players that stream or compete intensely already get peak and off peak times provided by their respective ISPs.

Then they select a time block, and play on it. Any streamer that competes with and plays in a time block that has high traffic will have a very crappy experience.

Sure you can pay to get speed, but read the fine print. ISPs can throttle down their best customer if the network is overloaded.

The feds have warned ISP companies about favoritism and legal action against the ISP will be very effective.

It's the crux of net neutrality. One speed for all. But offer premium for extra.

If certain players are not having a problem, then good for them. But it's only because they paid through the nose for it.

California has a weakness. Power lines and fire. They don't mix. California can all lose their networks easily because of fire. It's one state I would not be in. It's pretty, but the cost is high and the infrastructure is fragile.

At least Texas has its own power grid and has one of Ma Bell's legacy systems with iridium as a backup. And my home will go fiber in less than two years.

You can have the fastest anything, but that doesn't mean jack if you have problems with your game because a server is in the wrong damn state.

So, bandwidth or not, I think it's a game server issue.

Because WG stated long ago that the game can be run with the lowest end computer and standard net connection.

Now if they want to walk that comment back, then be my guest.

Because I already know the answer.

LOL 😎

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
366
[DUD]
Members
706 posts
2,470 battles
3 hours ago, SteelRain_Rifleman said:

If you remember the episode of Star Trek TNG

This part of your sentence alone makes us best friends! haha  Long live DATA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
704 posts
10,015 battles

FIX YOUR GAME...

Shells going through a dd playing dumb and showing broadside all game is the most stupidest crapever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
578
[WOLF5]
[WOLF5]
Members
868 posts
2,737 battles

 

2 hours ago, SteelRain_Rifleman said:

So, bandwidth or not, I think it's a game server issue.

Or much more likely it's just network latency, not personal bandwidth or a server hardware issue.  I do think however their netcode could do a LOT more to handle real world latency but also the reliance on the Telia peering network needs to be dumped ASAP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[DRFTR]
Beta Testers
2,138 posts

of course they can fix it... when shells fired from an almost stationary ship at a stationary ship, and the shells pass through ...   you cannot blame that on the internet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,196
[INTEL]
Members
1,775 posts
15,738 battles
10 hours ago, Navalpride33 said:

According to Flamu, you're wrong...  His score was affected not the players who shot at him... That is what he showed and WG agrees... According to WG, they will drag their feet as other priorities take precedence... For example

  • ordnance timer bug (over a min is counted twice...since 0.9.0) 

Until I see the changes in the patch notes coming up or a hot fix... This will take upto 5 patches to change...

That doesnt even make sense. If there is a lag, desync, or whatever other term you want to use affecting your outgoing its almost certain to be affecting your incoming. In fact we know it did happen in Flamu's video because we saw the bomb drop that clearly showed the bombs hit the water followed by delayed explosions and damage.

 I know I've experienced both ends of the issue. Multiple times recently I've been shooting and watched shells that clearly should have missed do damage and others that landed not even register. On other occasions I've taken a shot and had my shells still in the air when I get the hit ribbons and damage display. That one is really amusing when it's a dev strike! Yesterday I had two blatantly obvious occurrences. First in Perth. A Ryujo dive bombing. Every bomb lands off my starboard side... I drop from ~ 90% hp to around 1500. The second I was the beneficiary. In Kitakaze a torp from a red Kita pass under my stern. Not the tip either, just behind my rear turret. 

 I think WG needs to do everything they can to correct any problem they can, otoh, there's always gonna be some desync/lag/etc. Light doesnt even travel instantly, how can data going through multiple thousands of miles of wire, fiber, air, and possibly hundreds of digital switches possibly be expected to be instantaneous for all parties.

 Flamu tossed out his connection info. That's great, he has an amazing network. What it didn't take into account is the other player's network could be total garbage. I often play tethered to my cell. Trust me, I can tell the diff between my home and my phone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,819
[WORX]
Members
10,766 posts
18,591 battles
3 minutes ago, Ares1967 said:

That doesnt even make sense. If there is a lag, desync, or whatever other term you want to use affecting your outgoing its almost certain to be affecting your incoming. In fact we know it did happen in Flamu's video because we saw the bomb drop that clearly showed the bombs hit the water followed by delayed explosions and damage. 

Bombs are subjective... He/Flamu was talking about shells, he demonstrated shells, he never commented *IN Flamu's video* any issues with shells missing him.

Nor did he ever stated this bug affects incoming shells. That is why WG did the appropriate action based on their investigation... Which, we may see results after 5 patches down the road.

if it was a programming bug it goes both ways... I dont think its a major issue... Will see

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×