PDA

View Full Version : I can't be the only one: "How the F? I blocked that!?" You didnt because of P2P.



Gurkburk92
02-12-2017, 03:39 PM
You were not the host. You were playing against the host who has 0 delay and is infact ALWAYS one step ahead of you. You on the other hand, can have all the delay in the world like you were playing on a server. Even if you're sitting on 18ping against the 0ping host, you will still experience this

Koruin
02-12-2017, 03:40 PM
Chill, everything will be alright

Olikorn
02-12-2017, 03:42 PM
Host has same delay as everyone else: http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/1571773-Q-amp-A-on-For-Honor-s-Online-System

Gurkburk92
02-12-2017, 03:51 PM
Host has same delay as everyone else: http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/1571773-Q-amp-A-on-For-Honor-s-Online-System

No they do not.

The p2p system is exactly as Warcraft 3, where i was a longtime host to many games. The host does not have any delay at all.

Nowhere in that post does it say anything about the delay being "fixed" in their so called superior P2P.


Edit: I any many others will believe they have a "better" p2p system when they decide to show the actual ping of players, rather than a green/yellow/red bar.

Knight_Raime
02-12-2017, 04:04 PM
If you continue to blame the game you'll never get better.

That_Happy_Cat
02-12-2017, 04:29 PM
No they do not.

The p2p system is exactly as Warcraft 3, where i was a longtime host to many games. The host does not have any delay at all.

Nowhere in that post does it say anything about the delay being "fixed" in their so called superior P2P.


Edit: I any many others will believe they have a "better" p2p system when they decide to show the actual ping of players, rather than a green/yellow/red bar.

Direct quote from the thread:

"We often hear players talking about Host Advantage that is tied to classical P2P models. For Honor has its own network model that is different from game servers or traditional P2P where one of the players is elected as the game server (“the Host”). We don’t have a game host per se as the session host only manages the invites and handshakes of all players in that session. This is why the game can be impacted by a leaving session host, pausing the match for a brief moment until a new session host is elected, the game is synchronized and the match resumes.

During matches, every player runs a synchronized simulation and the game is played without any game host; all players are sending to all players what they are doing without the need of any answers from the other players thanks to the simulation. This is why our tech allows more reactivity and doesn’t have the “host advantage” problem of a traditional P2P model. When the match ends, the results are sent by all players to our arbitration service that validates its integrity. We also have other servers and systems that help us track and identify potential cheaters."

Sure it doesn't mention the word "delay" specifically but that's because it should go without saying based on the explanation that there's no traditional "host" to have a "host advantage".

My personal experience has been good: sure there's hiccups here and there (as to be expected) but they're relatively few, and this is playing from Australia. Before people sneer about "high latency advantage", almost all matches I've played in involve local players so no, you're completely wrong.

murathc
02-12-2017, 04:36 PM
Direct quote from the thread:

"We often hear players talking about Host Advantage that is tied to classical P2P models. For Honor has its own network model that is different from game servers or traditional P2P where one of the players is elected as the game server (“the Host”). We don’t have a game host per se as the session host only manages the invites and handshakes of all players in that session. This is why the game can be impacted by a leaving session host, pausing the match for a brief moment until a new session host is elected, the game is synchronized and the match resumes.

During matches, every player runs a synchronized simulation and the game is played without any game host; all players are sending to all players what they are doing without the need of any answers from the other players thanks to the simulation. This is why our tech allows more reactivity and doesn’t have the “host advantage” problem of a traditional P2P model. When the match ends, the results are sent by all players to our arbitration service that validates its integrity. We also have other servers and systems that help us track and identify potential cheaters."

Sure it doesn't mention the word "delay" specifically but that's because it should go without saying based on the explanation that there's no traditional "host" to have a "host advantage".

My personal experience has been good: sure there's hiccups here and there (as to be expected) but they're relatively few, and this is playing from Australia. Before people sneer about "high latency advantage", almost all matches I've played in involve local players so no, you're completely wrong.

do you see any other game doing this ?? please thing of BF 1 or COD doing this even for 8 ppl matches.
would u ever play it ? this is a QTE game. reaction matters. end of story.
sorry but i can not see any other game doing this so called new p2p.
and u know what it causes so fking many problems dcs freezes. i dont want to play with bots. want to play with humans. but i cant coz either every1 s dced! or i did dced! every ***ing time !

Gurkburk92
02-12-2017, 04:40 PM
Direct quote from the thread:

"We often hear players talking about Host Advantage that is tied to classical P2P models. For Honor has its own network model that is different from game servers or traditional P2P where one of the players is elected as the game server (“the Host”). We don’t have a game host per se as the session host only manages the invites and handshakes of all players in that session. This is why the game can be impacted by a leaving session host, pausing the match for a brief moment until a new session host is elected, the game is synchronized and the match resumes.

During matches, every player runs a synchronized simulation and the game is played without any game host; all players are sending to all players what they are doing without the need of any answers from the other players thanks to the simulation. This is why our tech allows more reactivity and doesn’t have the “host advantage” problem of a traditional P2P model. When the match ends, the results are sent by all players to our arbitration service that validates its integrity. We also have other servers and systems that help us track and identify potential cheaters."

Sure it doesn't mention the word "delay" specifically but that's because it should go without saying based on the explanation that there's no traditional "host" to have a "host advantage".

My personal experience has been good: sure there's hiccups here and there (as to be expected) but they're relatively few, and this is playing from Australia. Before people sneer about "high latency advantage", almost all matches I've played in involve local players so no, you're completely wrong.

As i said: They will have to show the factual Ping ingame for me to believe even the slightest that this is some "new p2p". Someones ping can be green from 0 to 150.

That_Happy_Cat
02-12-2017, 04:46 PM
As i said: They will have to show the factual Ping ingame for me to believe even the slightest that this is some "new p2p". Someones ping can be green from 0 to 150.

Latency is the time it takes for a packet to reach a target from you (and back?). From their explanation, everyone is sending packets to everyone else, so there can't be a unifying "ping" because you'd be "pinging" multiple targets with variation depending on mainly distance.

To give an actual number, they'd need to give up to seven.

Altair_Snake
02-12-2017, 04:51 PM
Their P2P is clearly different. I don't think all players see teh same thing at the same time, but the corrections to latency compensation paradoxes seem to be fair. And with teh new low tolerance for latency,the connecvity in the open beta is very good. The problem that remained was the matchmaking. I didn't have much time to play in the weekend. Did it get better?

Also... about blocking. I'm wondering about how it may feel like we're failing to block due to latency, when it might in fact be something else. Play with some bots, preferably assassins, and check it out for yourself. I'm suspecting there is a delay because if try blocking ons ide a bit too late, then this late input changes your guard to this side and makes it slower to go to the other side. So, the input is there, but the character takes some time to change his stance.

I'm also suspecting that assassin's limited block counts if you buff the input during your recovery, before you can actually block, then when you can block, some of the timing window will be gone and you can get hit.

These two factors are only suspicions, though. But if they're correct I actually think they'd generate a third factor:

These things gives you the impression that there is a big latency, when in fact there isn't. And this coaxes you into inputting your riposte too early, before you actually block; then you get hit again. :(

That_Happy_Cat
02-12-2017, 04:57 PM
Yeah, I get a lot of problems with matchmaking as people described, but very few during a game. The main one that happens is when someone leaves and it desyncs (sometimes resulting in someone I just killed coming back to life), but it doesn't happen often enough to bother me (YMMV, maybe Australians just don't quit that often).

I certainly don't perceive any lag issues with blocking compared to practicing with bots.

YakFruit
02-12-2017, 05:26 PM
Can confirm that level 3 bots have same way of getting around my blocks. It seems to be stance switching, to add to all of the raiders weaknesses, they switch stances really slow.