Jump to content

Dave

Founders [premium]
  • Content Count

    509
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

248 Excellent

About Dave

  • Rank
    Founder

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Eastern Oz

Recent Profile Visitors

550 profile views
  1. Dave

    WINGS OF LIBERTY (WOL)

    Why is the P40 mirror almost always locked on this server? The P40E had a mirror - it wasn't an optional extra - the aircraft left the factory with it attached.
  2. Approximately 10:00Z 17/09/2018
  3. I have tested this to death. I am always in constant voice comms with my wingman. This issue occurs when he is between me and a cloud. This is a bug. Unless bugs are intended it is not working as intended. If this doesn't happen to you I'm happy for you. It does happen to me - all the time - and I'm growing tired of other people proclaiming there is no problem just because it doesn't affect them. Regardless of whether the clouds are volumetric or billboarded, the game clearly tracks whether or not a player is "inside" cloud, and it is possible to transition from outside cloud to inside cloud consistently when approaching a cloud from the same side. Therefore the game seems to consistently model a cloud being on one side or another of a player. Similarly another aircraft when viewed from your own is either in front of the cloud, or obscured by it. If a cloud and a second player are both to one side of player one and player two sees the same cloud to the same side of their aircraft as the first, then player two is between the cloud and player one. If this relation does not hold (away from boundary conditions ) we have either a bug or a major design flaw.
  4. Bugger all - but its hard to respond to a post anywhere but in the same thread. Perhaps an admin can move them.
  5. You aren't understanding - your VPN terminator simply being in the Middle East doesn't reduce latency - it just doesn't make it impossible like a terminator in Antarctica would. Any VPN termination point off the shortest network path is only going to add latency in addition to the additional latency inherent in encapsulating traffic - which is what a VPN does. People use VPNs, and pay the attendant cost of latency, for secrecy or to alter their apparent location. VPNs do not - except in some very exceptional circumstances - reduce latency, simply because the packets still have to traverse all the same network segments - just encapsulated. I am sure - designing and maintaining these networks has been my day job for several years. The WiFi advice is correct. Do not use it for timing-sensitive applications. However, with respect to his particular problem, its not bad routing - its physics. You can't beat the speed of light, and the speed of light in glass is about 200,000km/s. Either way you go from Australia, WOL is about half a great circle away. But fibre paths don't follow great circles so the fibre path is actually about 1.5 times as long. Thats more than 30,000km - 60,000km for a round trip (which is what ping reports). Thats approximately 300ms - and that is with a single fibre and no switch gear, routers, firewalls or shitty copper tails or radio links over last-mile connections. Then you have inevitable packet loss due to collisions, congestion, wave cancellation, state table overflows, etc and the consequent retransmission that is just part of how the Internet works. That can add between 50 and 100ms as your packets transit tens or hundreds of intermediary networks and their associated switching and routing equipment. Packet handling in routers adds latency - and there are at least 20 between you and WOL (only some are detected by ping - most are "bump-in-the-wire" devices invisible to basic topology mapping tools). Then there is quantisation. To maximise aggregate throughput, networking equipment typically waits to fill a buffer (for the next transport layer network frame) before forwarding. If the MAC frames for a given link are large (to increase total bandwidth) and your packets are tiny then the delay to fill frames can become significant. You can naturally configure this behaviour for the links you manage but it isn't automatic and takes into account the general usage pattern of the link. Last but not least (actually not even last but I don't have time for more) there is processing overhead at the source and destination. You may have noticed your ping increases - sometimes dramatically - when the server has more players. This is because the server is not able to process network traffic at anywhere near line-rate and the added load of maintaining state for the additional players makes it slower to produce, consume and otherwise handle network traffic. The only way we antipodeans are going to have pings below 350 would be for a popular server to be hosted in the US. I even deployed one - making a personal compromise of 150ms over an AU hosted server - but noone would leave WOL. This can help, but you need to find a location for your proxy that is close to the network shortest path and which lies on a route which bypasses a problematic link or device (ie has a destination IP that will not be routed over the same slow link anyway). The proxy will at least avoid encapsulation overhead. The dynamic nature of routing rules outside your control will often defeat this over time and the gains are minimal anyway - WOL ping fluctuates by more than 30 ms from one minute to the next.
  6. The route traversed is not determined by a VPN. It is decided by backbone providers' border gateway and autonomous system routing rules. These take into account peering relationships between providers, cost, expected and measured latency, link state, link utilisation, congestion, cost and capacity between peering networks. There isn't even a single consistent path taken by packets traversing the Internet, due to the factors above and the underlying design of the Internet to be fault tolerant. Unless your VPN provider has built a shadow internet or owns significantly (in terms of Internet scale) large AS's they have little control over the flow of traffic beyond their own directly controlled networks in a way that could shorten the communication path relative to that taken by unencapsulated IP traffic. VPNs almost never reduce latency (it isn't impossible though) - and they always add overhead that increases it. They may also encapsulate traffic in ways that defeat a game's mechanisms to reduce latency - eg by tunnelling UDP inside SSTP. One way the path could be shortened physically is if your VPN tunnel connected from Perth to say Dubai or somewhere in India. But AS routing rules are designed in the main to minimise the transit time between origin and destination addresses. There is a reason the Perth to Indonesia and Middle East links are avoided - they are the oldest cables out of Australia with very low capacities and the other ends are in countries with shithouse network connectivity.
  7. Not on board with all the complaining but I do think marginalising an issue you don't personally have a non-existent is kinda selfish. For me in VR, when my wingman flies between me and a cloud he completely disappears. This is a problem.
  8. Watching Lost In Space on Netflix tonight because the game update is struggling to achieve 1.5kB/s on my 20Mb connection. Damn - needed to update my Mac OS install too - 3GB in about 30 minutes while streaming video. My 270 MB game update should be done by tomorrow evening.
  9. Dave

    A-20C, Yak-7B, and P-39L Default Skins

    You're welcome. And the author did mispell ensure. Even if you aren't a grammar nazi comparison with the stencilled text on the real aircraft should confirm this. The difference between ensure and insure is the same today as it was in 1939. Having made the effort to excel in English at school I am often irritated by modern corruption of the language and the ubiquitous acceptance of poor spelling and grammar today, even among those who write for a living. So, as if affected by some literary form of OCD, I am often compelled to highlight examples as they appear. My apologies.
  10. Dave

    A-20C, Yak-7B, and P-39L Default Skins

    Most of that looks correct as I skim over it - but it makes me wonder how many other details are wrong when the author couldn't spell "ensure". Some potentially useful info here http://www.rafweb.org/Squadrons/Sqn Markings/sqn_codes.htm
  11. Not for me. I run out of CPU long before GPU. Specs in my sig. Basically multicore optimisation in BoX is pretty poor to non-existant and hardware innovation moved to massively parallel a few years ago. I think the biggest issue for you is that 2GB is not enough VRAM to hold all the required textures on the card, so bandwidth is being wasted pushing textures from RAM to your GPU. I think 8GB is almost a minimum for fluid rendering now with many titles, BoX included. A 1080Ti will be plenty good enough and if you hold off about 3 months the price will drop by about 50%.
  12. Latest info on the next gen cards from Nvidia is: - name will be GTX 11x0 with the top end being the 1180 at launch; - 12nm process Turing architecture for gaming cards and Ampere for HPC (Nvidia architecture is diverging and specialising); - both will use GDDR6 - probably in 8GB and 16GB configurations (based on leaked info from Hynix); - should be announced at the conference in Taipei in June; - should start shipping in late July; - due to the higher production cost of GDDR6 expect about a 20% price hike over the same relative level 10 series cards. (I expect higher prices due to all the intolerable bandwagon-chasing crypto-currency noobs) I would have bought a Titan V already if I thought it would yield any improvement with BoX, but TBH my 1080Ti isn't being fully utilised as is. The CPU bottleneck is what needs to be resolved.
  13. Is there a plan to make the Multiplayer (Dogfight) browser actually work at all? For me the Ping column has never worked - usually displays 0 for most servers. And now sorting by anything other than server name doesn't work either. Given that there are dozens of empty servers these flaws render the multiplayer browser less than useless. Given also that the only populated server (during the hours I am typically able to play) is in some distant corner of Faknoeswheristan and kicks players with pings above their threshold it would be nice to know if joining was a waste of time before commencing the usual 5 minute join-fail-join cycle. While we're at it could you maybe address the really poor server rejoin experience. I understand that hotfixes to 3.001 should and will take priority, but this has recently reached an all time low for user experience and we've been waiting for most of these issues to be addressed since 2014. So it would be nice if improvement of the presently dismal multiplayer browse/join experience was prioritised as soon as 3.00X has stabilised. Tanks.
  14. I know you are just kidding, because the previous inverse condition hasn't stopped VVS pilots from playing online for the last 4 years.
×