Current game engine limits break game immersion.

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

Il-2 Battle of Stalingrad (BOS) issues are significantly braking immersion.

I have good gaming pc and connection to internet. Not only i noticed and commented this what we have seen. Look at this when there are more than a few planes on ground. When we all took off and lost sight of each other everything go back to normal.

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IftOlomtgc&feature=youtu.be

[Asgar]

never seen anything like this during FNBF. no matter how many planes

is that form the last mission? the server seemed quite stressed last mission a couple of people dropped out during the beginning of the mission. maybe it was a server issue?

Edited February 9, 2016 by I./JG3_Asgar

[Dakpilot]

To further isolate the cause, the server specs and ping/internet connection etc. possibly could have something to do with this rather unpleasant  and I fully agree 'immersion breaking' look

 

offline or online I have not seen this, however I don't believe I have ever been in such a large group forming up

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

It was last FNBF, it looks like netcode is not scaling very well.

[Asgar]

or the server is not powerful to handle everything that was going on. have you even seen how many ground forces were involved in addition to the 40+ players?

[Jupp]

~S~ Fellas,

 

This is a horrible example of anything, since there's something blatantly obvious here to be commented on.

 

 

Those soldier units walking around might not be "stock". They could be manipulations of .chr files which are

 

actually a component part of other objects in the Library. Namely arf_towers and certain other like - objects.

 

 

Now then, I am not crying foul there, whether you consider it a mod, hack, or ingenious use of resources is up

 

to you, because the ability to do this is accessible to anyone with enough working background knowledge in the

 

Mission Editor (*there are MCU's Play Animation and Translator Animation Operators for doing these things also).

 

 

So since I didn't write the mission, I really cannot say what methods they used, except for the major point now...

 

 

Any use of things like that, especially in multiple numbers, especially in close proximity, especially if "custom implemented"

 

should I say, and, especially in a session with many other things and players... is going to chew clock resources like crazy.

 

 

See also why He-111s are horribly optimized for Multiplayer, answer, Multi-Crew animated Puppets, just as those airfield guys are.

 

When you flew far enough away from those puppets... is when everything "went back to normal" is probably a more correct report.

 

 

I rarely quote people online , however, I will further support what I have stated with Dakpilot's comment :

 

"I fully agree 'immersion breaking' look offline or online I have not seen this".

 

My observation / explanation also would explain why that is, eh?

 

 

Crying havoc over the net code in this example then, is unfair. And trust me, I am not defending the net code. Only fairness.

 

And Tomcat, I do wish everything worked better than it does at this time, the sim is truly beautiful and fun enough to warrant it.

 

Support your local gunfighter.

 

 

Blue Skies,

 

!S -Jupp-

Edited February 10, 2016 by Jupp

[[DBS]Tx_Tip]

~S~ Fellas,

 

This is a horrible example of anything, since there's something blatantly obvious here to be commented on.

 

 

Those soldier units walking around might not be "stock". They could be manipulations of .chr files which are

 

actually a component part of other objects in the Library. Namely arf_towers and certain other like - objects.

 

 

Now then, I am not crying foul there, whether you consider it a mod, hack, or ingenious use of resources is up

 

to you, because the ability to do this is accessible to anyone with enough working background knowledge in the

 

Mission Editor (*there are MCU's Play Animation and Translator Animation Operators for doing these things also).

 

 

So since I didn't write the mission, I really cannot say what methods they used, except for the major point now...

 

 

Any use of things like that, especially in multiple numbers, especially in close proximity, especially if "custom implemented"

 

should I say, and, especially in a session with many other things and players... is going to chew clock resources like crazy.

 

 

See also why He-111s are horribly optimized for Multiplayer, answer, Multi-Crew animated Puppets, just as those airfield guys are.

 

When you flew far enough away from those puppets... is when everything "went back to normal" is probably a more correct report.

 

 

I rarely quote people online , however, I will further support what I have stated with Dakpilot's comment :

 

"I fully agree 'immersion breaking' look offline or online I have not seen this".

 

My observation / explanation also would explain why that is, eh?

 

 

Crying havoc over the net code in this example then, is unfair. And trust me, I am not defending the net code. Only fairness.

 

And Tomcat, I do wish everything worked better than it does at this time, the sim is truly beautiful and fun enough to warrant it.

 

Support your local gunfighter.

 

 

Blue Skies,

 

!S -Jupp-

 

Who the bleep are you to question the intregrity of the Mission Maker at FNBFs ? I am the Mission Maker  and if you have something to say then you say it to me.

 

Those walking zombies are part of the game engine and show up when using fuel or ammo bunkers period.

 

Well? You have some facts that there is some sort of shenanigans going on?

 

I push the envelope of this Sims online experience through FNBF every week to the tune of 12 to 16 hours a week doing the AAR creating the missions and making the briefs. I don't recall see you signing up for one.

You have something to say then you make sure you know what the bleep your talking about. 

 

Tip

[Jupp]

~S~ Tip,

 

Whoa Tip, cease fire, and my apology for how you read this.

 

I did state : "So since I didn't write the mission, I really cannot say what methods they used..."

 

And it's more about that the animations, no matter the context, make for clock overloading ergo "glitching".

 

I worded it poorly if you took this to mean that I suspect you're up to anything crooked, if I thought that, I certainly wouldn't type it out on a public forum.

 

My apology in all of that, however the fact remains that animations can cause these things moreso than almost any other issue in flight simulating.

 

Sorry,

 

!S -Jupp-

 

P/S- Here's the thread that discusses what I am on about, and I really shouldn't have "mused aloud" my own personal perspective on it regardless.

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/15424-infantry-airfields/

Edited February 10, 2016 by Jupp

[Beazil]

I assume you are talking about the planes "bouncing" up and down through the terrain?  Or did I miss something else?

[AbortedMan]

The issues you're seeing here are from loss of packets due to straining of the server machine and/or bandwidth. It's not accurate to say this is a limitation of the game engine as everything is running smoothly FPS and functionality-wise...it's only the updated location information that is being missed/lost during server/client transfer and causing the warping/floating/sinking. Furthermore, this could also only be affecting your client only and/or in different ways for other people. This could be a product of missing packets between your own internet circuit from your house to the server (Note: low ping does not mean you're not missing packets!).

 

Try providing the same type of scenario on a higher bandwidth connection with a more capable machine to host it on and that will be a better example/litmus test. Again, the "game engine" is not what you have issue with here, it's the current netcode implementation and its interaction with the server/hardware scalability...or it could simply be the server capability itself.

[Jupp]

~S~ Fellows,

 

And it is that straining (from puppets) which puts the thumb on the scale of judgment in concerns to both the engine and the net code.

 

That is /was /whatever was my point. I don't disagree that improvements to both would benefit the sim and it's experience for end users greatly.

 

I really need to learn some more about self editing and less about drawing friendly fire from people I admire as contemporaries.

 

Out,

 

!S -Jupp-  

[coconut]

It's worth pointing out that if you are too optimistic with your multiplayer settings on the client side, or if the up/down settings are set too high in the server, this could cause packet loss. Try to force too many UDP packets over a limited bandwidth and the routers will be free to silently drop all these precious packets. IIRC the devs' advice is 25% of your measured bandwidth (not the bandwidth advertised to you by your provider).

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

I know my connection parameters and i have it setup correctly. Btw others has seen

similar behavior. Net code is part of the game and very important in mp. It could be done better - others can do it. Going back to fps - they droped by 55% in that time.

[AbortedMan]

~S~ Fellows,

 

And it is that straining (from puppets) which puts the thumb on the scale of judgment in concerns to both the engine and the net code.

 

That is /was /whatever was my point. I don't disagree that improvements to both would benefit the sim and it's experience for end users greatly.

 

I really need to learn some more about self editing and less about drawing friendly fire from people I admire as contemporaries.

 

Out,

 

!S -Jupp-  

I'm a puppet for providing more insight into and proper terminology/pinpoint to the issue with the game that OP is discussing? That's a new one.

Edited February 11, 2016 by AbortedMan

[Jupp]

~S~ AB,

 

Nobody called you a Puppet. It's the terminology for 3d Models of Humans as you probably clearly know.

 

So tired of the passive aggressive BS from people who should be working together, for whatever reasons.

 

That, I will call you out on directly.

 

Pound Salt,

 

-Jupp-

[AbortedMan]

~S~ AB,

 

Nobody called you a Puppet. It's the terminology for 3d Models of Humans as you probably clearly know.

 

So tired of the passive aggressive BS from people who should be working together, for whatever reasons.

 

That, I will call you out on directly.

 

Pound Salt,

 

-Jupp-

My mistake Jupp. Apologies for the hairline trigger there.

 

The animated flightline walkers are client side, I think, as I've seen people describe them in a different location than what I see on my screen. I imagine they don't take up any more resources, local or otherwise, than a camo netting flapping in the wind since the bodies are basically just an elaborate ruse of an "animation" of the ammo boxes.

 

I'm merely pointing out that what the video clearly shows is not limitations of the usage of local resources and lack of optimization, but a clear inefficiency of distributing and receiving data over a network. This can be caused by a myriad of things...calling it "engine limitations" is extremely low on that list of causes.

Edited February 12, 2016 by AbortedMan

[[DBS]Tx_Tip]

Okay did some tinkering. Well we'll certainly see tomorrow if raising up the bandwidth and lowering the general entity along with moving vehicle count makes a significant difference as far as FNBFs is concerned. Including removing most of the blocks with zombies where there are certain to be several players spawning in and then will taxi to take-off for launch.

 

Btw I saw this same floating business and occasionally some serious funkiness last Sunday when we, [DBS] and friends, all piled into a couple of the servers with 30 to 45 players already on board. Generally the same mo. We're all formed up on the runway waiting to taxi and others will spawn in as fighters or such and just start doing strange things.

 

So It would appear that 9 to 12 Heinkels and or Stukas, Pe-2s in close formation are just too much when approached by fighters or coming up on a ground target with some flak when there are a significant number of other players on the server. No matter what the server or settings.

 

Packet loss is definitely occurring to some players but not all players and at times with nothing going but why? 

 

As far as our server the CPU itself never goes over the 50% level. Even with a full contingent of players and all sorts of stuff going on. And there is a lot of stuff going on with these missions at times. Which is the point of FNBFs.

SPS doesn't drop below 49.7 and Ticks remain within what should be funkiness free levels with some peaks.

Network Utilization never even comes close to approaching Full capacity. 

 

I only have my personal observations with this but the more planes and other things that the updates bring. The more demanding this seems to be on the servers hosting large numbers of players and as far as I'm concerned, creativity in designing MP missions that are immersive.

If the actual current netcode implementation and its interaction with the server/hardware scalability is a root cause then it's way beyond my paygrade to deal with it.

 

See what happens tomorrow.

[[TWB]Pand]

I'm not sure we ever heard an official response back from the devs regarding how the dserver utilizes multi-core processors, if at all.

 

From my experience the dserver seems to only utilize a single core for certain dserver calculations (rather than multiple), so if you're running a quad core system with hyper-threading disabled), one core maxed out would only show 25% total cpu usage.

 

Essentially, it will look like you've got plenty of room to grow; however, you're really capped on the single core's clock speed and processing power.

 

:salute!

[Jupp]

~S~ Tip and AB,

 

The sum of the whole being greater than it's parts, is what a community is.

 

I apologize for having upset you both in this thread, if I were a more effective communicator, my own would upset would have been avoided too, I am sure.

 

 

Tip, your posting above, is a great turn of events, incorporating direction to take action, hopefully corrective, the speed of that turn around, increases with collective computation (group thinking).

 

AB, like Tip, you boffins have contributed immensely to the hobby that has become my war wife, I will submit I have the widest respect, and regard, for members of this community that contribute.

 

 

 

I'll take a last pass, Quote Myself, to review this matter, and how it all relates, and then let it go :

 

"See also why He-111s are horribly optimized for Multiplayer, answer, Multi-Crew animated Puppets, just as those airfield guys are.

 

When you flew far enough away from those puppets... is when everything "went back to normal" is probably a more correct report".

 

 

That goes for all multi-crew aircraft. Each individual puppet is roughly equivalent to a single-seater aircraft in terms of resources.

 

So this is why 9 He-111's use the resources of yes, (roughly) 45 single aircraft, and also why I said seeing 3 or more of those puppets...

 

walking around in the very same frame... is causing clock cycle strain, not only on the server, or clients, but server and clients alike in feedback.

 

The server is the Balancer of the mean average of all participants I/O flow. That is what Simulations Per Second, and Ticks, is all about, relaying.

 

Animations are the hardest thing for that Server, of any information, to balance between everything, and packet loss is a compensator to avoid disconnection.

 

The first part of that "system failure" is glitching. "Warping" or "Rubber Banding" and "Bouncing"of Aircraft are all "Artifacts" of timings being off. Timings.

 

Animations are Timing heavy dependant.

 

 

When your computer, or the server, is overloaded to a "component dangerous capacity" or just can't cut the mustard, disconnect is the hardware protective failsafe.

 

Unless you'd rather wake up someday to a melted hole in the floor of your living room. We are after all, at the end of the day here, dealing with electron manipulation.

 

Now all of that wall of text should be so full of holes that I might have to change my callsign, to Hans Christian Anderson. But there I have made my peace I again hope.

 

 

My bad too,

 

!S -Jupp-  

 

P/S- I hope someday to be truly welcomed on a FNBF session. I'm just not a very good pilot so I tend to stay in the hanger reading Field Manuals.  

 

 

 

 

Edited February 12, 2016 by Jupp

[coconut]

For what it's worth, On Night Attack on Kalach I'm very close to having severe connection/spawn issues. When I first made the mission, I could not connect to the server. There were three ground battles, with I think 50 tanks in each. I had to scale down to one battle to be able to join. At this point there were still problem when attempting to spawn. Selecting an airfield wouldn't open the vehicle selection box, and when you did manage to get a vehicle, pressing start did nothing. I have some plans to try to find where exactly is the limit, some time this week-end.

 

In its current shape, the mission appears to work, but it still takes some time when connecting to get a fully responsive system.

 

Utilization-wise, I think I peak at 15ms tick delay (yeah, that's high, but I'm trying to find the limit there), and network load never comes close to the limit. In these conditions, it's a bit surprising that problems start occurring.

[[DBS]El_Marta]

Jump in as a gunner to save computing ressources.