43 replies to this topic

[Supreme Cmdr]

We already know that in the upcoming BCM mp patch (and BCG itself), you cannot host a Net server unless you are behind a broadband connection or running a local LAN game.

So, this poll is to find the average connection for BC gamers in order to see how far the packet trimming priorities should be pushed.

We all know that 56K connections suck for games. Big time. But not everyone has broadband (cable or xDSL) at this time. Which means that in the event that you are playing on a 56K dial-up connection against broadband users, you can and will experience problems (the same as other games).

One idea I'm toying with, is to have server operators configure their servers to allow or dis-allow broadband users. e.g. you can run a game on your DSL connection, but only allow 56K dial-up users to play. This way, everyone on the server has a fairly similar experience. And if you have broadband, you can play on a server which only supports broadband users. These three choices (broadband only, dial-up only, mixed) should probably help even things out.

[Charles Lindsey]

[indent]quote:

---

These three choices (broadband only, dial-up only, mixed) should probably help even things out.

---

[/indent]That seems very generous and seems like it would be a hit. I had planned on getting cable for multiplay but this would be great for those who just can't get it yet.

[Epsilon 5]

Very nice idea - an innovation indeed. But it'll require more than choosing your connection in a box to prevent cheating

My guess is there will still be a ping filter?

[Supreme Cmdr]

[indent]quote:

---

Originally posted by Tac:
Will you also be allowing the server operators to configure the game so that the server god can set the server to deny people with certain pings OR kick out those who'se ping has gone beyond the limit?

---

[/indent]The server op will do this by either setting the ping threshold or the serve will auto-run a ping test on any client that tries to connect. We are working on other tricks that I cannot reveal or, naturally, they would be circumvented.

BCM is sending a lot of info across the connection (it is a large game!) and the packets are likely to get quite large - especially since parts of the packet require guaranteed sends.

This is why I came up with this idea in order to minimize the amount of aggravation I'm going to get once people without broadband start b*tching about bad connection performance.

In fact, if it pans out, I may increase the public connection threshold to 32 (will still be 64 on official fleet servers - which will definitely be broadband only) in the BCM mp patch. The limit is going to be 64 in BCG mp for public servers and 128 for official fleet servers).

...then by next year when the BCO server stress test opens, I'll start cramming 1000 people into special BCG fleet servers which will be running the newer and more advanced mp code developed for BCO.

[ 06-15-2002, 09:31: Message edited by: Supreme Cmdr ]

[Supreme Cmdr]

[indent]quote:

---

Originally posted by Epsilon 5:
Very nice idea - an innovation indeed. But it'll require more than choosing your connection in a box to prevent cheating

My guess is there will still be a ping filter?

---

[/indent]The architecture is client/server with server side authentication and anti-sniff/scan checks. Cheating is going to be practically non-existent.

[Supreme Cmdr]

[indent]quote:

---

Originally posted by Charles Lindsey:
[indent]quote:

---

These three choices (broadband only, dial-up only, mixed) should probably help even things out.

---

[/indent]That seems very generous and seems like it would be a hit. I had planned on getting cable for multiplay but this would be great for those who just can't get it yet.

---

[/indent]Remember that just because a server will only allow 56K clients, doesn't mean that the game will be as smooth as broadband clients running on a broadband server.

The purpose of this restriction is allow gamers with like connections to have the same or similar experience without having to hardcode and throttle the connection to take into account HPBs playing on servers with LPBs.

[Epsilon 5]

[indent]quote:

---

(it [i]is[/b] a

---

[/indent]Man, choose your formatting! you can't do both with only one opening and one closing tag

[indent]quote:

---

The architecture is client/server with server side authentication and anti-sniff/scan checks. Cheating is going to be practically non-existent.

---

[/indent]I wasn't talking about cheating itself - only cheating about your connection type. Doesn't matter anyway. Well, here goes my homing IODs

[Commander Elio Jason]

i'll take trashing my older brother online any other day!

[Unforgiven_Killer]

great idea...I have 56k (if i could I would get DSL..but its not inservice here) and I hate when I play certain online games where people move much faster then me...thank god for Speed Hack..hehe

[Urza]

My 'other' response is a U of MD provided T3 connection. Superb pings, by the way. (single digit!)

[Epsilon 5]

[indent]quote:

---

(single digit!)

---

[/indent]That means you are a SHPB

[Kartoffel]

Single digit pings. Really. What next? Negative pings?

[Supreme Cmdr]

...I'd like to get my hands on the bastards who are voting against having server configured client connect types. I wonder why anyone would vote against such an idea. See what happens when you let loose the dogs of democracy? I should just lay down the law next time.

[Epsilon 5]

[indent]quote:

---

Originally posted by Kartoffel:
Single digit pings. Really. What next? Negative pings?

---

[/indent]LOL! that like getting an answer before asking a question

My guess is they will switch from ms to μs - AKA micro-second A thousand time smaller.

[Urza]

[indent]quote:

---

Originally posted by Supreme Cmdr:
...I'd like to get my hands on the bastards who are voting against having server configured client connect types. I wonder why anyone would vote against such an idea. See what happens when you let loose the dogs of democracy? I should just lay down the law next time.

---

[/indent]Agreed. I can't imagine any ligitimate argument one may argue against it.

[indent]quote:

---

Single digit pings. Really. What next? Negative pings?

---

[/indent]Single digit is best case scenario. Usually they're in the 20-30 range.

[ 06-15-2002, 22:01: Message edited by: Urza ]

[Supreme Cmdr]

OK, something's burning my ass.

So far, eight people have voted against having server configured client types. I'd like to know why, so that I can be a part of the ludicrity that is to follow.

So, lets discuss it, shall we?

[Pedro Pablo Laracuente]

Maybe they don't know what the h*ll that means

Seriously, the only thing that i think could get people vote against that is the fear of every but a few servers being broadband only....