Urban Terror Forums: Urban Terror 4.3 - RELEASE ! - Urban Terror Forums

Jump to content

 Login | Register 
Advertisement
  • (12 Pages)
  • +
  • « First
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Urban Terror 4.3 - RELEASE ! Rate Topic: ***** 1 Votes

#111 User is offline   Nstar Icon

  • Account: nstar
  • Main tag: [COD]
  • Country:
  • Joined: 22-February 13
  • Posts: 71

Posted 05 January 2017 - 11:13 AM

View PostZmb, on 05 January 2017 - 03:39 AM, said:

Did you try to aim ?


lol, I knew that reply was coming.
Yeah, we tested it scientifically as well in a few private servers and even standing still and shooting each other 1 shot at a time with guaranteed correct aim while not moving we still got roughly 1/12 hits. It's that bad.

#112 User is offline   Iye Icon

  •   head moderator   
    Co-Chief Community Moderator
  • Account: iye
  • Country:
  • Joined: 07-June 11
  • Posts: 1,001

Posted 05 January 2017 - 02:24 PM

Hm. maybe i should play on some high ping servers to see that in action. Because on pings <=50 there are no issues at all.
Sorry for my bad spelling - I am still asleep. :)

|=| Iye's UrT Addon |=| Firefox Personas |=| Maps |=|
http://www.mediafire...vk3a602hcfg.jpg

#113 User is offline   Nstar Icon

  • Account: nstar
  • Main tag: [COD]
  • Country:
  • Joined: 22-February 13
  • Posts: 71

Posted 05 January 2017 - 03:22 PM

Did a lot of experimentation today.
With snaps local/host and sv_fps all set to 125 the hits are amazing, but there is a crazy stutter frame lag (126 constant in gui though).
The only way to get rid of the stutter completely is everything at 20. At 20, the hits are marginal, slightly worse than in 4.2 (I realize behavior should be exactly the same in this instance, but there is an actual, tested difference)
On popular pug servers where we get >200 (FA and East CTF namely) the hits are mind numbingly bad. Private scrim servers range from awesome to just as bad. I haven't discovered any magic numbers on our server, but 20 seems to be the most consistent across different players. Some of us got turbo hits at 30/60/120/125 and others none at all. Running snaps at half fps seems to work, but fps lower than snaps was awful.

#114 User is offline   Iye Icon

  •   head moderator   
    Co-Chief Community Moderator
  • Account: iye
  • Country:
  • Joined: 07-June 11
  • Posts: 1,001

Posted 05 January 2017 - 04:54 PM

snaps should be kept at 20, sadly. as you noted, in "theory" it improves performance, but it also causes lags, which simply didnt come up in testing.
Sorry for my bad spelling - I am still asleep. :)

|=| Iye's UrT Addon |=| Firefox Personas |=| Maps |=|
http://www.mediafire...vk3a602hcfg.jpg

#115 User is offline   karnute Icon

  •   community dev   
  • Account: karnute
  • Joined: 09-August 11
  • Posts: 157

Posted 05 January 2017 - 05:46 PM

View Postxoai, on 05 January 2017 - 03:22 PM, said:

Did a lot of experimentation today.
With snaps local/host and sv_fps all set to 125 the hits are amazing, but there is a crazy stutter frame lag (126 constant in gui though).
The only way to get rid of the stutter completely is everything at 20. At 20, the hits are marginal, slightly worse than in 4.2 (I realize behavior should be exactly the same in this instance, but there is an actual, tested difference)

The stutter is probably related to model prediction and its interaction with netlag compensation (inside server). It is already present in 4.2, but only lightly noticeable in some clients (64 bits ? or linux, mac) at snaps = 20.

View Postxoai, on 05 January 2017 - 03:22 PM, said:

On popular pug servers where we get >200 (FA and East CTF namely) the hits are mind numbingly bad. Private scrim servers range from awesome to just as bad. I haven't discovered any magic numbers on our server, but 20 seems to be the most consistent across different players. Some of us got turbo hits at 30/60/120/125 and others none at all. Running snaps at half fps seems to work, but fps lower than snaps was awful.

Have you tried snaps and sv_fps=25 (with 125fps in clients)?
All time/frequency related computing are done internally by delays in integer milliseconds. 125 fps means delays of 1000/125= 8 ms. for screen updates. Also, snaps=20 (or sv_fps=20) means 20 snaps/second, or delays of 1000/20= 50 ms in network updates (server send position of other players, etc). 50 is not divisible by 8. But 25 snaps/second is equivalent to cycles of 1000/25 = 40ms and 40 is exactly divisible by 8. Maybe, having position updates in multiples of screen prediction could improve something. At least 25 snaps/second is not that much load compared to 20 snaps/second...

On the other hand, the stutter was always there but diminished by the effect of snaps capped to 20, supposing there is not a constant value of 20 snaps (or 50ms. delay) fixed in some internal computing (or implicit in some expression) instead of using the variable value setting.
The stutter (and indirectly fps drops and missed hits) seems to depend on the relation between the ping computed by server (the one shown in scoretab) for players involved. I observed (inside the same server) that most stutter (and less hits) is noticeable in other players with ping not multiple of 8ms. as I usually have ping=48 (in scoretab but 24 or 32 shown in client with cg_drawFPS).

#116 User is offline   KarlMariaSeeberg Icon

Posted 08 January 2017 - 09:18 PM

View Postkarnute, on 05 January 2017 - 05:46 PM, said:

The stutter is probably related to model prediction and its interaction with netlag compensation (inside server). It is already present in 4.2, but only lightly noticeable in some clients (64 bits ? or linux, mac) at snaps = 20.


Have you tried snaps and sv_fps=25 (with 125fps in clients)?
All time/frequency related computing are done internally by delays in integer milliseconds. 125 fps means delays of 1000/125= 8 ms. for screen updates. Also, snaps=20 (or sv_fps=20) means 20 snaps/second, or delays of 1000/20= 50 ms in network updates (server send position of other players, etc). 50 is not divisible by 8. But 25 snaps/second is equivalent to cycles of 1000/25 = 40ms and 40 is exactly divisible by 8. Maybe, having position updates in multiples of screen prediction could improve something. At least 25 snaps/second is not that much load compared to 20 snaps/second...

On the other hand, the stutter was always there but diminished by the effect of snaps capped to 20, supposing there is not a constant value of 20 snaps (or 50ms. delay) fixed in some internal computing (or implicit in some expression) instead of using the variable value setting.
The stutter (and indirectly fps drops and missed hits) seems to depend on the relation between the ping computed by server (the one shown in scoretab) for players involved. I observed (inside the same server) that most stutter (and less hits) is noticeable in other players with ping not multiple of 8ms. as I usually have ping=48 (in scoretab but 24 or 32 shown in client with cg_drawFPS).


i did not understand a word here but it stills sounds compelling. if my fps are set to 60 and my ping is basically the same as yours (draw>18-32) and 48 in scoretab, what should my snaps be at? currently set them to 60.

cheers,
karl
if you don't like uptown, you are basically hating urban terror.

#117 User is offline   karnute Icon

  •   community dev   
  • Account: karnute
  • Joined: 09-August 11
  • Posts: 157

Posted 08 January 2017 - 10:56 PM

View PostKarlMariaSeeberg, on 08 January 2017 - 09:18 PM, said:

i did not understand a word here but it stills sounds compelling. if my fps are set to 60 and my ping is basically the same as yours (draw>18-32) and 48 in scoretab, what should my snaps be at? currently set them to 60.


Sorry, my suggestions were directed to server settings testing (sv_fps) to see if there is some default value with better results in general with many players. There are not magic bullet values for clients, since also snaps is only allowed integer values and not all desired net-update cycles delays can be obtained from truncating the integer part of 1000/snaps. Also the server internally probably is updated with other cycle (maybe 40Hz), so this could make other values of snaps to fit better (maybe 20 and 40).
Additionally, very high values of snaps tend to saturate the network transmissions from server and cause delays in the server frame update, hence my suggestion to test sv_fps 25 (that will cap clients to this value also) that is not very high.

If you have maxfps 60, then you have client render cycles of int(1000/60)= 16 ms. the values for snaps 59, 60, 61 and 62 will produce all 16ms. but they are too high and could saturate network (and cpu used to read network). Other value could be snaps 31 to obtain a multiple (32ms). Also be aware that you need to test high values of snaps on a server with a higher value of sv_fps, but many admins have already reverted sv_fps to 20 to avoid problems, and in that case your snaps will be capped to 20 anyway.

My last paragraph about stutter depending on ping relations between players was only an approximated observation that will need many more tests to confirm or refute.

#118 User is offline   Nstar Icon

  • Account: nstar
  • Main tag: [COD]
  • Country:
  • Joined: 22-February 13
  • Posts: 71

Posted 08 January 2017 - 11:10 PM

We tested with 25, and while I felt no difference, some teammates complained about stutter and "Hits?!?!"

As for the ping being divisible by 8, we can't be of any help. We all have pings from 180-320 with huge variance in the top right gui value (stable in the scoreboard though).

In our case there also seem to be too many variables at play to really find a magic setting. With identical settings, we have wildly different experiences on different servers. For us there is so much variability due to global networking paths and/or server performance.

  • (12 Pages)
  • +
  • « First
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users

Advertisement


Copyright © 1999-2020 Frozensand Games Limited  |  All rights reserved  |  Urban Terror™ and FrozenSand™ are trademarks of Frozensand Games Limited

Frozensand Games is a Limited company registered in England and Wales. Company Reg No: 10343942