FC2 Online

[Rikus]

With my old connection of 512 kbits download thats 64 kb, i host 14 persons on il2 and goes very very smooth.

 

In the present day, with 10 megas and better CPU, i host 8 persons on FC2 and BS, and always always always, lag.

 

That sucks a lot.

 

Greetings

[104th_Crunch]

You need a good upload speed as much as well as download speed. While there is room to improve, what other Sim of modern jets lets you fly with a large group of people online?

 

There is a reason that many game servers of all sorts of different games use dedicated ~$100/month servers. There is a lot more going on in FC2 in terms of calculation than IL2 I am sure with missiles etc.

[Rikus]

what other Sim of modern jets lets you fly with a large group of people online?

 

Falcon.

 

Much more than FC, and much older sim.

 

Greetings

[104th_Crunch]

Really, people have flown Falcon with 60 people in the same mission before?

[nomdeplume]

Maybe try to verify that your clients are using reasonable speed settings on their end so as not to be requesting too much data from your server. Also, maybe if you describe the 'lag' people can tell you if it's normal or not. I don't think the DCS/FC2 netcode is all that great; but I barely ever get to play on servers with less than 200ms latency, anyway.

[Udat]

Really, people have flown Falcon with 60 people in the same mission before?

Not only 60, but "much more" than 60, apparently :music_whistling:

[GGTharos]

Pics or it didn't happen ;)

 

Not only 60, but "much more" than 60, apparently :music_whistling:

[Eddie]

Really, people have flown Falcon with 60 people in the same mission before?

 

Never had as many as 60, but I've flown missions with between 40 and 50.

[Rikus]

Falcon 18 people and very very smooth.

 

Yesterday night, again, FC2 9 persons, lag, a mission with 7 triggers.

 

The worst CPU of the 9, is a Core 2 Duo at 2.666 mhz.

 

Also the worst connection is ADSL 6 megas download and 640 kb of upload.

 

The host have 12 megas download and 1 mega of upload.

 

After 40 min, crash.

 

Greetings

[Panzertard]

Here's another angle for the server capabilities.

Also, keep in mind - IL-2 is not FC2. Different virtual worlds, different AI's, different actions, different (amount of) communication.

 

-----------------------

2 mbps upstream, 2mbps downstream:

- 14-15 good, lots of groundwar, no problems.

- 16-18 players, US residents may start getting high pings (I'm in Europe).

Some US players may get kicked for low ping.

- 20 players, I wont go there.

 

Most players use their ADSL 256/128 settings.

Server was set to 1 LAN.

 

Estimate 130Kbps per user for good quality. If it gets lower you may start to see desync or latency issues.

 

9 players on 640Kbps uplink is ~71Kbps per player.

You can try to set server bandwidth lower to see if you can gain better performance under such low bandwidth (upstream).

Edited September 14, 2010 by Panzertard
KB -> Kb

[Renato71]

dunno about falcon, but with IL-2's dedicated server you will have much better results then hosting on a players PC.

 

thats what is needed for FC2 - dedicated server, not "a PC where you will host, but will not play on, and it has to better then anybody elses PC".

 

I've hosted from my home (700/250) IL-2, FC2 and DCS on a same PC, some old xp2500+ with 7600gt card and 4GB ram. I was playing on my PC, sharing the same up/down load with server. there was no problem when running dedi IL-2 and with 8-10 players (I was no able to get more people at that time).

with both FC2 and DCS, God forbid there is more then 5 people (including me!), God forbid there are more then 8 missiles in the air, and God forbid there are more then 20 ground units.

 

and everything depends so much on graphical setting on the server itself, that it alone can gulp 50% of FPS at least!

quick example - last night a buddy and I were playing some duel for our League. he was serving. he has much better PC then I, so he tuned all graph settings to max. I had stutter like I was having nicotine crisis. then he tuned down. no stutter.

 

online, I was amazed to see civil traffic when I clearly remember that I turned that off. why is it that I have to see civ traffic, despite turning it off? and other settings along that line....

but, you can fly trough the trees!

 

net code should have been priority.

 

thats why lately I spend more time playing IL-2 then FC2 - ability to play with many people without any problems - and with no need to spend endless hours tweaking the PC and/or the game!

 

it should work perfectly out of the box, on any PC and in any country. simple graphical tuning using provided options should be sufficient, and graphical setting on server should have no influence on ping, stutter, lag, data recording or anything.

 

few years back I had no problems flying big FC1 a2g missions with many other players. today, I do not dare to join if there are more then 8 players, and completely avoid any ground units. and I have twice as better PC, and 5 TIMES FASTER LINK!

 

all that fanatical detailing on vehicles was such a waste of time. I never had any chance to observe any of those details first hand (while flying) (not even when crashing into them). I rather have dedicated server then screws on license plates.

 

there are too much details, chocking up in silly net code.

 

 

things like that are putting people away.

all members on my forum that used to play FC1, bought FC2. one third of them dropped out cos their PC cannot run the game properly, and one third dropped out on account of net and other problems - spending more time fixing then playing. about 10% of those that initially bought DCS are still playing it (other gave up, sold their copy...)

 

simultaneously, number of active flyers in my community grew FIVE TIMES (to the number!) when I expanded forum to accommodate IL-2 players!

 

go figure.

 

 

and you guys talk the truth about 50-60 players in Falcon - wait for me!

which version? of, af, ff?

[InFireBaptize]

^^ +1 to dedicated server :-) but even with dedicated server you might still get stutter and lag here and there, one good example is ArmA2 but that could be a bad net code.

[104th_Crunch]

I never had unplayable experiences like you say Renato. Running Win7 64, E8600 @ 3.6, GTX 280, 2GB. 9.5 Mb down, .5 Mb up.

 

Sure many things could be improved, and I wish multiplayer for FC/DCS could get more priority, but things are not that bad for the majority of players out there. Who knows what DCS will bring, but I am sure improvements will come in time.

[Panzertard]

Renate, I can understand what you are saying.

 

 

But remember to consider this, some of these factors may explain why we are where we are today with FC2:

• IL2 / F4 Falcon may not need to share the same amount of data across the network. It really depends on the fidelity and what kind of reproduction of objects & physics you need to reproduce on the other end (client end).
  
• IL2 / F4 are still other products developed by other vendors, different people, different programming.
  
• The need to balance largescale fights vs pushing a product out the door to benefit from the income.
  
• 'Supports large enough sessions + higher bandwidth today compared to 2000' is a terms that comes to mind. General availability of network bandwidth.
  
• A game/Session can be hosted without problems without a standalone dedicated (non UI) server.
  

These factors and more may come together to present the current FC2.

 

Yes we all want:

- Standalone dedicated servers. But I cannot comment on performance, because I've not seen any performance issues related to the server being standalone dedicated (non UI) or not. Unless it's lowend hardware.

(True, I'm not lying - I've not experienced it on any of the 3 servers I run regularly) :)

But at least for practical reasons, standalone dedicated is easier to manage and administer (automate).

 

- We want 'good netcode'. Of course we want low latency, low bandwidth requirements for any game. :)

But can we have it? Any prereqs preventing it from happening? Don't know.

Cost for development vs customer base may be one.

Edited September 15, 2010 by Panzertard

[Rikus]

I search lot of forums, and many people have the same problem.

 

ED sims are very soft yes, but i want it for ONLINE, not for OFFLINE.

 

We have a powerfull editor, but for what? online is not stable with 8-10 persons.

 

I don´t like to follow UFOS.

 

Always de same song.

 

I hope for next DCS, they get a solid net code, and forget the grass of runnways...

 

Greetings

[104th_Crunch]

We have a powerfull editor, but for what? online is not stable with 8-10 persons.

 

You just cannot say that. Not stable with what server? The 104th has a dedicated server that has high bandwidth. We regularly have 30+ players and as long as everyone has a reasonable ping and recent PC hardware, everything is perfectly STABLE. There are other servers like the 51st, RAF that also have a high number of players.

 

No, things are not perfect, but you can have a stable game with many players. I see it everyday.

[Renato71]

^^ +1 to dedicated server :-) but even with dedicated server you might still get stutter and lag here and there, one good example is ArmA2 but that could be a bad net code.

 

that is true, but on the other hand, I cannot run arma2 on my PC at all (at decent level of graphics), so I would like to attribute lagg to that.

I had no problems with Arma1 on this PC, and max players I participated with was 15-20 or something like that. And then, lagging was individual problem that others had experienced, and could be attributed to their link, not PC quality!

 

I never had unplayable experiences like you say Renato. Running Win7 64, E8600 @ 3.6, GTX 280, 2GB. 9.5 Mb down, .5 Mb up.

 

dude, respect, but I cannot afford me such PC. and I do not understand why should I have something like that. adn I do not want to spend my money (that I need to earn over 365 days) on a game (that I will play around 30 days). NOR does any of the other that I've talked with.

in my community there is about 1 in 10 of active players that is willing to spend extra (BIG) money on games. 3 of 10 are coping at best. 6 of 10 gave up. is that commercial thinking? loosing customers en masse?

 

my current PC is twice as better then the one I had when I was playing FC1 online for the first time.

but, weblink in my country is quite crappy and outdated. equipment is more appropriate for DSL television (download only) then gaming. about 80% of us CANNOT HOST dcs/fc2 using default MP options, or any tweaks at all. we have to use tunngle or alike!

that I cannot change. Still - I want to stress that - no net problems in IL-2 or similar. there, about 30-40% cannot host OR clients are having too large ping with them. OR !

 

 

@Panzertard

again, respect, but all that you have stated are PROBLEMS, that have to be fixed and should not be considered as "features".

fi newcommers are reading this, they will ask "why should I buy this if there are so many playability problems?"

And they are asking me. What am I supposed to say? something along this lien:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=977421#post977421

 

But can we have it? Any prereqs preventing it from happening? Don't know.

Cost for development vs customer base may be one.

 

Look, fixing the net code will INCREASE customer base! all that is need tis that someone gets down from their clouds where few worshipers have placed them.

I'm telling you true numbers - I've lost many members to above mentioned and other problems. And all of them - including still active players - are saying that they will NOT purchase any future product form this series if those problems will be present.

 

I'm not trolling, just that I'm sad cos I cannot help them or mayself.

they all have different PC's and links and they do NOT want problems like that.

 

@ Rikus

YES

On top of that, many practical things that existed in FC1 were thrown out, like customizable payloads, skins, borts, and many "simple" things are non-existent.

[Renato71]

No, things are not perfect, but you can have a stable game with many players. I see it everyday.

 

... and I will never be among them - thats my point!

 

who are those 30? are they playing for hours? how many are there in week, 30 or 30x7 ?

why is it that 80% of other servers are empty at the same time?

meaning, if there are 20 server, how many are playing for hours? 30x20 or 30x1 and 0x19 ?

 

if mentioned problems are fixed, EVERY SERVER will have MORE THEN 30 people EVERY DAY!

[GGTharos]

dude, respect, but I cannot afford me such PC. and I do not understand why should I have something like that. adn I do not want to spend my money (that I need to earn over 365 days) on a game (that I will play around 30 days). NOR does any of the other that I've talked with.

in my community there is about 1 in 10 of active players that is willing to spend extra (BIG) money on games. 3 of 10 are coping at best. 6 of 10 gave up. is that commercial thinking? loosing customers en masse?

 

 

I'm sorry, but hardware requirements only go up, not down. There's no nice way to say this: Upgrade or be left in the dust, like it or not.

 

Now, putting that aside ...

 

Look, fixing the net code will INCREASE customer base! all that is need tis that someone gets down from their clouds where few worshipers have placed them.

I'm telling you true numbers - I've lost many members to above mentioned and other problems. And all of them - including still active players - are saying that they will NOT purchase any future product form this series if those problems will be present.

 

The network code does need to become multi-threaded to start with ... all in due time, but will it happen in FC2? I don't think so, personally.

[InFireBaptize]

I personally think that every PC game should have a dedicated server files, isn't that what separate PC from console gaming? Also FC2 is not a console port so why not has a dedicated server!

[c0ff]

I hear you!

[Panzertard]

Renato, c0ff heard you :D

 

And yes, I happen to agree with you - I think there's a potential for increased customer mass if we see better MP code and standalone dedicated servers.

What I tried to say is that these decision often happens from a business point of view - so presenting good evidence for increased business revenue will make a good case for promoting the ideas. :)

 

Keep presenting good arguments for these things, we need it.

[Renato71]

don't assume that I'm speaking out of my selfish arse. in fact - I need you to make this thing playable so that I will have somebody to play with :)

or that selfish dude will piss me of to single player again, like he did before, I forgot his nick.

 

I'm telling you the simple math that I have observed in my community.

Do you need actual numbers?

I will proved them for you, although this is something that ED should have done on their own.

 

But, I think that "30 people on 104th" says enough - it is WAY TOO FEW considering that number of PC users has grown, that internet connections have improved, and that internet became more accessible.

it is the SAME number as 5 years ago. It should be 5 times more, at least.

 

look, people are dropping OUT because PERSISTENT PROBLEMS WERE NOT SOLVED AND NEW ONES ("many's") WERE INTRODUCED.

I'm doing my best to put a calm and joly face when discussing this with my buddies, but it is not possible any more...

 

I'm sorry, but hardware requirements only go up, not down. There's no nice way to say this: Upgrade or be left in the dust, like it or not.

 

no, no, no! you CANNOT say or do things like that!

people will think that you are creating an elite club. unless that is what you want? if so, then I cannot support this series in any way.

and, who will pay for it? if customers base shrink, prices will rise.

and, you will be left alone, there will be 50 of you having your rare parties, while 1000 of other will have fun playing something else. can 50 of you fund DCS in full? or would you like those 1000 to chip in? or will you settle with breadcrumbs?

 

Now, putting that aside ...

 

no,no,no!

that's the main issue - putting aside everyday problems. and under "everyday problems" I mean problems that you have every day with FC2. In fact, that people with average equipment in average country have.

 

The network code does need to become multi-threaded to start with ... all in due time, but will it happen in FC2? I don't think so, personally.

 

in a way, porting FC to DCS environment seems like BAD idea after all :(

 

 

look, I bought DCS ka-50 and never really spent any time playing it. my purchase was a my way to support this project.

so, basically, I've jumped from FC1 into FC2. now, in full honesty and risking bad response, excuses like "its an inherited bug from DCS" are sad cover for "poor programing skills and no testing at all".

 

sadly, it is not only me that thinks like that, just that I'm among those few that dare to speak of it :(

 

 

there are only TWO things that truly put me off, and its a story of its own, not much related to what I'm trying to relate here - other peoples experience.

if you wish, and have time to read, I'll compile an article.

[BlackSharkAce]

Hardware requirement go up that is a true statement.. you say it yourself

... considering that number of PC users has grown, that internet connections have improved, and that internet became more accessible...

 

I mean the requirement go up along with the average hardware that's it. I don't feel like todays requirement are above today's average hardware.

 

My 2 cents.

[Rikus]

The network code does need to become multi-threaded to start with ... all in due time, but will it happen in FC2? I don't think so, personally.

 

If i know, i don´t bought FC2, and keep with FC1

 

FC2 finally, is a poor way to get new Cash.

 

I think i´m not the only one who have now the face of a silly just for buy it.

 

Greetings

 

EDIT:

 

Speed connection beside, i don´t know why every time a trigger activates, all the mission and players, stop for a second, generating lag...

 

"FC2 have missiles in the air, sams" Falcon also have it and go very very smooth. Sorry for say again Falcon, but that is not an excuse for FC2 - DCS

Edited September 15, 2010 by Rikus