Urban Terror Forums: Yet another ping/lag problem - Urban Terror Forums

Jump to content

 Login | Register 
Advertisement
Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Yet another ping/lag problem Rate Topic: -----

#1 User is offline   ge0rdie Icon

  • Account: ge0rdie
  • Country:
  • Joined: 28-December 10
  • Posts: 32

Posted 20 February 2017 - 05:27 AM

Hi all,

Background: I live in Australia and play UrT v4.3.2. So a while ago while talking to a friend in NZ, I discovered that he had a much better ping to the US West coast than I did. His was 190ms, mine 250ms. I stated digging. Turns out his traffic went North via the Southern Cross cable to Hawaii, and on to California where the server is. Mine was going North-West to Guam, then West to Hong Kong then east across to California. I decided to go to the extreme and swap ISP to one that uses Southern Cross Cable. Also I have been told that cable is faster/less latent than DSL.

My ping to the server (from the command line) has dropped from 250ms to 175ms, Wahoo !!!! traceroute shows that I am no longer going via Asia, but going via Southern Cross Cable as planned.

Problem: When I hit <tab> in game, it still says my ping is 250ms, and the game still plays like it is.

Related info:
  • My cable is 130Mbps down 2Mbs up
  • My laptop is a Skylake core i7 with 32Mb RAM and Nvidia GTX970M graphics running Linux Mint 17.3
  • I am running at 3440x1440 resolution which is native for my 34" ultrawide monitor.
  • No-one else is using the cable (my laptop is the only thing plugged in to it at the moment)
  • I can literally have my laptop pinging 177 and a computer on the old DSL pinging 250 at the same time.

There is no local slowness, it seems like just plain old lag. Now I can accept a bit of lag, but I would expect some improvement after reducing my ping by almost 30%. With UrT telling me my ping is still 250, makes me think I am missing something.

Questions
  • Why does the in-game ping say 250 when my real ping is 175 ? (My friends in game ping roughly matches his real ping)
  • Why seeming no improvement in lag after a 30% decrease in ping ?

Any thoughts/suggestions ? (other than playing on a closer server)

thanks
--ge0rdie

#2 User is offline   travmon Icon

  •   verified user   
  • Account: travmon
  • Country:
  • Joined: 12-April 11
  • Posts: 63

Posted 20 February 2017 - 06:45 AM

If you use cl_maxpackets 125 for example it can raise your ping. what is the ping in the upper right corner say instead of the tab/scoreboard ping?

#3 User is offline   ge0rdie Icon

  • Account: ge0rdie
  • Country:
  • Joined: 28-December 10
  • Posts: 32

Posted 20 February 2017 - 08:01 AM

View Posttravmon, on 20 February 2017 - 06:45 AM, said:

If you use cl_maxpackets 125 for example it can raise your ping. what is the ping in the upper right corner say instead of the tab/scoreboard ping?


Hi Travmon,

The ping in the top right flickers between 240 and 260ms
Also getting 92fps

Some further detail:

seta cl_packetdup "1"
seta cl_maxpackets "42"
seta rate "16000"
seta com_blood "1"
seta com_processpriority "2"
seta com_maxfps "85"
seta com_hunkmegs "512"

geordie@tardis:~ > ping utfclan.net
PING utfclan.net (45.33.53.134) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from li1003-134.members.linode.com (45.33.53.134): icmp_seq=1 ttl=50 time=172 ms
64 bytes from li1003-134.members.linode.com (45.33.53.134): icmp_seq=2 ttl=50 time=182 ms
64 bytes from li1003-134.members.linode.com (45.33.53.134): icmp_seq=3 ttl=50 time=176 ms
64 bytes from li1003-134.members.linode.com (45.33.53.134): icmp_seq=4 ttl=50 time=176 ms
64 bytes from li1003-134.members.linode.com (45.33.53.134): icmp_seq=5 ttl=50 time=176 ms
64 bytes from li1003-134.members.linode.com (45.33.53.134): icmp_seq=6 ttl=50 time=173 ms


--ge0rdie

This post has been edited by ge0rdie: 20 February 2017 - 08:17 AM


#4 User is offline   travmon Icon

  •   verified user   
  • Account: travmon
  • Country:
  • Joined: 12-April 11
  • Posts: 63

Posted 20 February 2017 - 09:26 AM

With that computer and connection you should get better performance with cl_maxpackets 125, com_maxfps 125 , rate 32000 , and have com_hunkmegs at default 800 or higher, and it should also stabilize your ping.

#5 User is offline   ge0rdie Icon

  • Account: ge0rdie
  • Country:
  • Joined: 28-December 10
  • Posts: 32

Posted 21 February 2017 - 12:49 AM

View Posttravmon, on 20 February 2017 - 09:26 AM, said:

With that computer and connection you should get better performance with cl_maxpackets 125, com_maxfps 125 , rate 32000 , and have com_hunkmegs at default 800 or higher, and it should also stabilize your ping.


Sweet, will try it out tonight and let you know how it goes !

bullet_loaderAdvertisement

#6 User is offline   ge0rdie Icon

  • Account: ge0rdie
  • Country:
  • Joined: 28-December 10
  • Posts: 32

Posted 01 March 2017 - 07:45 AM

Looks like I am getting some improvement there, thanks travmon.

But only 10ms, not enough !

The plot thickens . . .

So just as a random thought, I decided to fire up my VPN to SYD, fcuk me, my ping dropped by 50ms to 200, WTF ?

To experiment further, I connected to an end point in LA, low and behold, I am now getting 178 in game ping to match my real world ping.

Conclusion: Urban Terror is making routing choices for me, and making them badly !

If I force all traffic to USA using a VPN, my ping is good, if not it is crap.

My OS (Linux) pings at the 177 rate so it is routing correctly, so the game must be making an assumption and sending UDP traffic by another route.

Any UrT net code gurus able to explain ? (by which I mean fix)

Theory: something to do with talking to (or via) the root server(s) ?
Or maybe the game using specific DNS server ?

--ge0rdie

This post has been edited by ge0rdie: 01 March 2017 - 07:55 AM


#7 User is offline   Iye Icon

  •   head moderator   
    Co-Chief Community Moderator
  • Account: iye
  • Country:
  • Joined: 07-June 11
  • Posts: 1,054

Posted 02 March 2017 - 12:11 AM

Im pretty sure UrT is unable to decide a route. Thats in the nature of networks.

Additionally, the packets are send via UDP, ping however is a TCP thing.

Now i have no idea what it does for DNS lookup, but i would expect it asks localhost. Also connections to a server should not be related the master server, as thats a separate service, and you can connect to a server without the master server being online.
Sorry for my bad spelling - I am still asleep. :)

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

#8 User is offline   ge0rdie Icon

  • Account: ge0rdie
  • Country:
  • Joined: 28-December 10
  • Posts: 32

Posted 05 March 2017 - 07:28 AM

Hi Iye,

I would tend to agree, that UrT doesn't decide routes.

But it is doing something.

- Force all traffic to server location using VPN - 177 ping
- Without VPN - 250 ping

That is a very big difference !

--ge0rdie

#9 User is offline   Iye Icon

  •   head moderator   
    Co-Chief Community Moderator
  • Account: iye
  • Country:
  • Joined: 07-June 11
  • Posts: 1,054

Posted 05 March 2017 - 02:19 PM

Sure, however, that doesnt proove anything. You are forcing a route, vs you are not forcing a route doesnt mean its UrT deciding the route. Your ISP does that, but if you force traffic somewhere else, it will go there "first"
Sorry for my bad spelling - I am still asleep. :)

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

Page 1 of 1
  • 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 © 1999-2024 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