Multiplayer Campaign Issues
-
this is starting to get a little bit too much for a 1998 game, something is seriously wrong…
No, all is normal. With BMS 4.33 more bandwidth is required due the control surfaces (and more) are now share in MP
BB
-
this is starting to get a little bit too much for a 1998 game, something is seriously wrong…
Sorry, its not 1998 game anymore… And now we live 2015 so least here in Finland 100/100mb connections are quite normal.
Dynamic campaing requires lots of traffic, biger bubble -> more units -> more data to share -> more bandwith required.
Even DCS requires lots of bandwith if you have big mission
-
@Bad:
No, all is normal. With BMS 4.33 more bandwidth is required due the control surfaces (and more) are now share in MP
BB
How much more? Docs recommend 500. This thread indicates some are needing 1024. Haukka is suggesting 2048. How much more is ACTUALLY needed.
And Black1 is right. At 1024 you start to seriously limit what a ‘normal’ host can accommodate. At 2048, that ‘normal’ host is limited to very few clients which utterly ruins the opportunity for ad hoc MP multi-flight missions.
Speeds are generally increasing, but upload always lags DL and here it’s typical to have around 5 up …. maybe 10. That’s ~4 to 8 at 1024; obviously half that at 2048.
What is the required bandwidth per client with the hires tileset?
-
Sorry, its not 1998 game anymore… And now we live 2015 so least here in Finland 100/100mb connections are quite normal.
…
Good for you. Any chance you’ll open your system so the rest of us can use it as a server?
-
not wanting to go into the debate but for the sake of the example, we made a 7ship earlier today with 1024 and it was smooth as silk
-
^^ in 32-bit due to a guy completely the other side of the world still running Windows XP and close formation during RTB phase was flawless.
Dubious connections we know from Mav-jp’s post are a big no-no. Are there other factors at play where people are having problems?
-
@Red:
not wanting to go into the debate but for the sake of the example, we made a 7ship earlier today with 1024 and it was smooth as silk
Maybe time to update the BMS manual …. already.
Connection Bandwidth is a very important aspect of multiplayer. Nowadays a client should not connect with less than 500 kilobits per second (kb/s). If a server wants to allow 10 clients, each with 500 kb/s, it should at least have 10 x 500 = 5000 kb/s of upload bandwidth available.
What this means is mission makers that were hosting 12 - 16 players two weeks ago can now only host 4.
-
What this means is you’re taking things out of context, though at least you’ve read the manual
Simple TE with few objects = not much going on = less data being shared across the network = 500 sufficient.
More complex TE or campaign = more going on = more or much more data being shared = 500 probably not sufficient.BMS Manual states you should not connect with less than 500. I think we can agree that advice is valid. The network improvements in 4.33, especially the additional shared control surfaces and the smoothness in close formation obviously take additional bandwidth. If you’re comparing with 4.32 you’re not comparing like for like.
-
What this means is you’re taking things out of context, though at least you’ve read the manual
Simple TE with few objects = not much going on = less data being shared across the network = 500 sufficient.
More complex TE or campaign = more going on = more or much more data being shared = 500 probably not sufficient.BMS Manual states you should not connect with less than 500. I think we can agree that advice is valid. The network improvements in 4.33, especially the additional shared control surfaces and the smoothness in close formation obviously take additional bandwidth. If you’re comparing with 4.32 you’re not comparing like for like.
Fine. So what is the answer:
-
Sorry, its not 1998 game anymore… And now we live 2015 so least here in Finland 100/100mb connections are quite normal.
Dynamic campaing requires lots of traffic, biger bubble -> more units -> more data to share -> more bandwith required.
Even DCS requires lots of bandwith if you have big mission
Thank you for your useless answer, now take your 100mb connection and go surf the internet to find out how common a 100mbit is in 2015… Thanks again for the precious information,
-
LOL
-
Further research: After confirming 2048 worked, we accidentally started a game back at 1536. Despite having most of the mission of relatively empty water, it was another object loading failure, nothing visible. Today, a couple of 3 man campaign missions at 2048 per client and all is well, despite one client having closed ports and the server having anti-virus still on. Questions:
Is there a better way to determine when you’ve run out of bandwidth than flying the whole mission? If the failure occurs, will all buildings, for example, fail to load?
Will turning off control surface syncing in config noticeable reduce needed bandwidth? What about shrinking bubble sizes? -
Sounds like its going to be a constant problem for us down under when my best speed to our server is going to remain something like this for the near future.
We have seen airfield textures and buildings disappear, random aircraft destruction, dubious Awack calls and simultaneous app crashes on our way home already.
-
~1mb upload should be OK for a client, I guess even if you don’t use all of it but something like 800-850kb, you will still be OK. Just it seems like the usual 512 may be problematic for campaigns.
-
I suspect it not necessarily only about pure statically bandwidth but periodic instability.
As with the guys who say they have kick arse connections but still seem to have regular TeamSpeak drop outs.
-
bandwidth issues aside, someone has seen the acmi file enclosed in the first post by Black?
We can understand ghost aircrafts and objects popping out from nowhere as bandwidth issues…but, how can you explain these things:
1. two f16 (human) downed by ghost Lau rockets shot from nowhere to the stars at 30000ft
2. me and black engaged by a flight of blue F-15C…is this a bug or is AI blue on blue implemented on 4.33? I didn’t remember to have seen anything about that in the manual
3. another human F16 (Vandroy) that destroys vehicles by popping its flares *EDIT: actually he wasn’t defensive…he only activated the jammer…??? (probably this is more a tacview error?)and what you can’t see:
- constant AI Awacs chatter about invisible enemies (RWR & FCR naked) that inhibit any comprehensible human radio comm
- with IVC extra heavy radio noise (that’s a good addition, but maybe it has to be scaled down a bit) that gets quite impossible to communicate clearly with package members (Soul and me were having difficulties chatting on UHF at around 3-4 miles horizontal separation and 10000ft vertical sep). again this is an interesting implementation but it’s hindering a little the practicality of the sim-flight experience…
thanks for your thoughts…anybody…
-
I think there is something else going on with network load. I played a few campaign missions yesterday, as client, with 1024, and had no problem. I think I might look into logging network load during play to see what the average is, and if there are any spikes. Also seeing occasional issues of random plane damage… yesterday it was a teammate getting hit at 22k above the FLOT. Event log shows no hits. Day before that it was a friend rejoining, and suddenly every other deagged plane exploded.
-
Does the “host controls all units 0” setting help to reduce bandwidth requirements?
-
Very interesting thread here for me. Already made a thread with questions regarding MP in 4.33 but no answers so long. So this go out to the BMS 4.33 MP Pros which REALLY knows what has to be done:
Just a few words to our squadrons initial situation: we have a dedicated server with 13000 upload available, BW upgrade is NOT an option there. We have TE flights with around 16-20 pilots, sometimes higher amounts with up to 30 pilots. We have around 4-5 pilots which are forced to connect with a “dubious connection” for technical reasons (mainly becoz they have only IPv6 connections available which inhibit proper Port forwarding).
So here comes the questions:
1. What is the minimum bandwith setting required for clients, 512? What is the recommended BW?
2. Are “dubios connection” really a NO-GO in 4.33? Or is it not a problem as long as there are just a few?
3. Regarding control surfaces / pilot head movement, can i disable that eye candy to save BW?More to come …
-
Dubious connections we know from Mav-jp’s post are a big no-no. Are there other factors at play where people are having problems?
Well yesterday we had an MP flight. Not Campaign but TE in Korea…
For the dubious I don’t know…
The server was showing all clients as P2P.
2-3 clients in the lobby where seen by me and others not as P2P but CS. What does this CS mean? their port was different than the known Falcon ports.
We had and a member with 200 connection speed.We had many problems… all aircraft where ships in ships… One inside the other. Thankfully when taxi there where no collisions crash.
Phantom airplanes. I couldn’t see some contacts and they weren’t showing up in my recorded ACMI.