Tick Rate of Servers

(Mangosteez) #1

Pls enlighten me. I would like to know what tick rate these servers are running at.

(BomBaKlaK) #2

I heard something like 60 but not sure

(demsix) #3

Not this again. While tick is important, people act like it’s the only factor in good netcode. It isn’t.

(Ashog) #4

//youtu.be/VRaTzRJHh0M

(Protekt1) #5

No one said that.

This is a far better video explaining things.

(PixelTwitch) #6

[QUOTE=Protekt1;504169]No one said that.

This is a far better video explaining things.[/QUOTE]

lol actually in all fairness the video really badly explains things >.<

(Mustang) #7

Good luck persuading Nexon to increase the tickrate or let us host our own servers…

(Mangosteez) #8

Just trying to get a clearer picture. Lag comp, netcode, tick rate, something is off. And since the game heavily rely’s on adadadad, I dont appreciate bad hitreg. Out of everything that encompasses a game, my main concern is good reliable hitreg.

(DJswirlyAlien) #9

Tick rate won’t fix game design problems as BF4 showed us. If anything upping the tick rate in BF4 made it worse. Like the game was balanced for 10hz or something.

(stealth6) #10

I don’t know all the complexities of tickrate etc, but I think BF4 has more entities, bullet drop, bullet traveltime & a different game engine. In other words can you compare the two that easily?

(demsix) #11

BF4 has client-side hit detection. All the bullet drop / travel time is calculated on your machine and sent to the server. It’s why you continue to get shot even though you’re behind walls in that game as well.

(Protekt1) #12

I said the video explains things better. Keyword: better.

In relation to the other video posted, yeah it really does explain things better. Keyword better. Understood yet? Hope so.

I played bf4 with the upped tickrate and I immediately noticed it is much improved.

(PixelTwitch) #13

[QUOTE=Protekt1;504281]I said the video explains things better. Keyword: better.

In relation to the other video posted, yeah it really does explain things better. Keyword better. Understood yet? Hope so.
[/QUOTE]

Actually sir…
You said “This is a far better video explaining things.”

Its funny how you say far better when the other videos never actually tried to explain it at all…
The comparison could not be drawn… so in that respect the far better is actually irrelevant…

Unless of course you was talking about the videos production value being far better.
In that case its a highly subjective argument… Both of the other videos had much more effort put into their editing and visual content…

So… Honestly…
All our arguments are void since the initial explanation was flawed.

lol, I am joking around by the way…
#kissandmakeup

(Protekt1) #14

[QUOTE=PixelTwitch;504287]Actually sir…
You said “This is a far better video explaining things.”

Its funny how you say far better when the other videos never actually tried to explain it at all…
The comparison could not be drawn… so in that respect the far better is actually irrelevant…

Unless of course you was talking about the videos production value being far better.
In that case its a highly subjective argument… Both of the other videos had much more effort put into their editing and visual content…

So… Honestly…
All our arguments are void since the initial explanation was flawed.

lol, I am joking around by the way…
#kissandmakeup[/QUOTE]

You don’t need someone commenting over a video for it to explain something. The first video does explain a lot through demonstrating 128 u/d still having issues.

(Raviolay) #15

Call me stupid if you like, but how is the server handling more data by sending and receiving information more often. Going to have anything but a positive affect on the gameplay for the end user?

(demsix) #16

Servers don’t run on thin air. If you get a playable experience and can have 10 virtualised servers per box instead of 5, then running at a lower tick and having more servers makes more sense from a business perspective. The game is still more than playable, more servers, less players in queues.

I wish there was a way of measuring how much netcode is to blame for poor multiplayer experiences. Because skill, ping, connection quality, computer spec all play roles as well. You’re never going to get a LAN experience over multiplayer, so there will always be slight imperfections.

(Mustang) #17

Increasing (lets say doubling) the data sent to and from it means double the number of server side computations, for hardware running at optimal efficiency (i.e. near maximum capacity) it will completely choke and won’t be able to keep up, resulting in severe performance degradation for all players, the only way to not choke the hardware would be to half the number of game servers running on it, which would mean twice as much hardware would be required and therefore twice the cost to purchase/run/maintain/etc, which is why I said good luck in getting Nexon to do this.

(ailmanki) #18

Well in favour of the game, they should give this a try… If it does indeed make the game better playable its worth the price.
Instead of having to do crazy workarounds. Don’t forget the developer costs which have to improve something which otherwise would be simple.
Also hardware will only get better with time.

Still questionable if this will have such a great impact on the player experience. Maybe the tickrate is not the issue here. But I totally agree it could be a huge factor.

(Mustang) #19

Tickrate can’t possibly be a major contributing factor yet, we need way more performance optimisation passes before looking for the icing on the cake.

(Raviolay) #20

I agree with this, but if the game’s going to push movement like wall jumps, hops & long jumps (and anything else they decide to throw in, without content to support it). Would not a higher tickrate make the game less reliant on prediction when a target is performing these moves?

On a side note I have to say the idea of a premium service for higher tick rate servers is something I would personally go for.