Zok.4956
-
Posts
1,952 -
Joined
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Events
Articles
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by Zok.4956
-
-
@RedCobra.7693 said:
@Zok.4956 said:@RedCobra.7693 said:@Zok.4956 said:@Ayrilana.1396 said:@RedCobra.7693 said:@Ayrilana.1396 said:@RedCobra.7693 said:it has been clear for months that this is something that anet need to sort outBased on what?heres the response from anet long awaited.Nowhere in that post does Anet say that it’s on their end.Yeah, that post does not feel like a honest response to me, but more like typical corporate-speak.And? None of those posts rule out it being the connection between them and the servers. It also doesn’t necessarily rule out the issue being on their end entirely either.Since that post, we’ve had a few players post that when they had reached out to Anet, their particular issue was determined to be due to their ISP. I think one may have been because of something on their end with their PC. I can’t remember.Two posts (from me) that show that there is a problem on Anets side (it is not the internet, it is not the customer, it is not the ISP of the costumer) that Anet has to fix:Sure, there are probably players that have packet loss because of bad WLAN/cable/ISP/Internet, but this does not negate the fact that there are problems on Anets side.many players already found this issue is more prominent on the LS4 maps and some PoF maps the fact that people keep repeating the "Check your ISP" comment is a bit moot at this point.And yet others on the exact same map instance doing the exact same meta have no issues.Here is a good explanation: (from @"VoxShatterfall.5470").I do not know how close to the reality the explanation is, but from a technical point of view it seems consistent and could make sense.I dont think running pings and traces with IP's is going to help at allfacts usually help more than speculation. I do not know if you have looked and read the second post. I did proove, that the lag spikes I experienced during my test in Thunderhead Peaks are in fact caused by Anets servers (server systems, software, ..).Maps can have the same IP at the same time, it isnt one IP per map. while these IP's changeA specific map instance can only have one IP. If two players are in Thunderhead Peaks and have the same /ip, they are in the same map-instance. There are no two Thunderhead Peaks maps (instances) that will have the same IP at the same time. If players are in Thunderhead Peaks but have not the same /ip, they are in differente maps-instances.you should re-read what I said, jahai bluffs had the same IP address as Thunderhead peaks at the same time 18.196.234.184 i didnt say the same map had the same IP in two different instances, data will be NAT'd after that and map instances will be on private addresses.I did re-read it and still do not understand, what you wanted to say/correct with your response. Because I did not say, that there could only be one map behind an IP.
theres too much conflicting information with the diagnostics that has been posted.
Do you mean that there is something wrong/confliction information inhttps://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/1332422/#Comment_1332422or is this a more general statement?
and first and foremost with large issues you should be identifying trends.
Sure. That is often a good starting point.
so far the only trends that have been established by the community are
- predominately on LS4 and PoF maps
- Does not affect all players but a large enough majority to spark discussion.
- this affects both EU and NA
I do agree with that. I actually wrote the first two items myself some time ago. And for me (I do not work for Anet, but I often search and fix software/server/network issues as part of my work) it would be enough to take a closer look into the systems and to make internal tests and measurements before I would blame the customers. Because this trends point to Anets servers/systems/software.
But for some this is not enough and they still believe that it is mostly the internets/players fault. So I tried to make some measurements to replace opinion with fact and my above post with the traces of the tcp-data-connection did show proof that in fact Anets servers/systems/server-game-software (and nothing else) caused skill-/lag-spikes during my test.
-
@Ayrilana.1396 said:
@Zok.4956 said:@Ayrilana.1396 said:@RedCobra.7693 said:@Ayrilana.1396 said:@RedCobra.7693 said:it has been clear for months that this is something that anet need to sort outBased on what?heres the response from anet long awaited.Nowhere in that post does Anet say that it’s on their end.Yeah, that post does not feel like a honest response to me, but more like typical corporate-speak.And? None of those posts rule out it being the connection between them and the servers. It also doesn’t necessarily rule out the issue being on their end entirely either.Since that post, we’ve had a few players post that when they had reached out to Anet, their particular issue was determined to be due to their ISP. I think one may have been because of something on their end with their PC. I can’t remember.Two posts (from me) that show that there is a problem on Anets side (it is not the internet, it is not the customer, it is not the ISP of the costumer) that Anet has to fix:Sure, there are probably players that have packet loss because of bad WLAN/cable/ISP/Internet, but this does not negate the fact that there are problems on Anets side.ICMP requests are different from the data packets that get sent between the servers. Running a ping doesn’t show the route that the data takes back from the servers to the player.yeah, I know, its complicated technical stuff, so I just give you the summary from the second link where I examined the data packets during my ThunderHead Peaks skill-lag:
"Summary: The map-server (hardware, software, virtual-system, etc.) sometimes does not send data-packets to the game-client, this is not a normal server behaviour on a map where something happens and it results in a client that can not update its own state (skill activations, position of other players/npc etc...) during this communication-silence and this is a reason for skill-lag."
many players already found this issue is more prominent on the LS4 maps and some PoF maps the fact that people keep repeating the "Check your ISP" comment is a bit moot at this point.And yet others on the exact same map instance doing the exact same meta have no issues.Here is a good explanation: (from @"VoxShatterfall.5470").I do not know how close to the reality the explanation is, but from a technical point of view it seems consistent and could make sense.The issue with that is that some players consistently have issues while others consistently don’t. That player’s post would imply that the software is specifically choosing the same players over and over to de-prioritize. That seems unlikely.non-deterministic software/systems bugs ("strange behaviour") happens a lot more often than most people (and developers) can imagine.
But it doesn't matter if VoxShatterfalls explanation seems likely or unlikely to us. Because it is not the customers job to explain why the system behaves (sometimes) like it does. It is Anets job to find the bug(s) and fix them.
-
@RedCobra.7693 said:
@Zok.4956 said:@Ayrilana.1396 said:@RedCobra.7693 said:@Ayrilana.1396 said:@RedCobra.7693 said:it has been clear for months that this is something that anet need to sort outBased on what?heres the response from anet long awaited.Nowhere in that post does Anet say that it’s on their end.Yeah, that post does not feel like a honest response to me, but more like typical corporate-speak.And? None of those posts rule out it being the connection between them and the servers. It also doesn’t necessarily rule out the issue being on their end entirely either.Since that post, we’ve had a few players post that when they had reached out to Anet, their particular issue was determined to be due to their ISP. I think one may have been because of something on their end with their PC. I can’t remember.Two posts (from me) that show that there is a problem on Anets side (it is not the internet, it is not the customer, it is not the ISP of the costumer) that Anet has to fix:Sure, there are probably players that have packet loss because of bad WLAN/cable/ISP/Internet, but this does not negate the fact that there are problems on Anets side.many players already found this issue is more prominent on the LS4 maps and some PoF maps the fact that people keep repeating the "Check your ISP" comment is a bit moot at this point.And yet others on the exact same map instance doing the exact same meta have no issues.Here is a good explanation: (from @"VoxShatterfall.5470").I do not know how close to the reality the explanation is, but from a technical point of view it seems consistent and could make sense.I dont think running pings and traces with IP's is going to help at allfacts usually help more than speculation. I do not know if you have looked and read the second post. I did proove, that the lag spikes I experienced during my test in Thunderhead Peaks are in fact caused by Anets servers (server systems, software, ..).
Maps can have the same IP at the same time, it isnt one IP per map. while these IP's change
A specific map instance can only have one IP. If two players are in Thunderhead Peaks and have the same /ip, they are in the same map-instance. There are no two Thunderhead Peaks maps (instances) that will have the same IP at the same time. If players are in Thunderhead Peaks but have not the same /ip, they are in differente maps-instances.
-
@Ayrilana.1396 said:
@RedCobra.7693 said:@Ayrilana.1396 said:@RedCobra.7693 said:it has been clear for months that this is something that anet need to sort outBased on what?heres the response from anet long awaited.Nowhere in that post does Anet say that it’s on their end.Yeah, that post does not feel like a honest response to me, but more like typical corporate-speak.
And? None of those posts rule out it being the connection between them and the servers. It also doesn’t necessarily rule out the issue being on their end entirely either.Since that post, we’ve had a few players post that when they had reached out to Anet, their particular issue was determined to be due to their ISP. I think one may have been because of something on their end with their PC. I can’t remember.Two posts (from me) that show that there is a problem on Anets side (it is not the internet, it is not the customer, it is not the ISP of the costumer) that Anet has to fix:
https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/1328421/#Comment_1328421https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/1332422/#Comment_1332422
Sure, there are probably players that have packet loss because of bad WLAN/cable/ISP/Internet, but this does not negate the fact that there are problems on Anets side.
many players already found this issue is more prominent on the LS4 maps and some PoF maps the fact that people keep repeating the "Check your ISP" comment is a bit moot at this point.And yet others on the exact same map instance doing the exact same meta have no issues.Here is a good explanation: (from @"VoxShatterfall.5470").https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/1279563/#Comment_1279563I do not know how close to the reality the explanation is, but from a technical point of view it seems consistent and could make sense.
-
@Avatar of Indra.6908 said:On a serious note though, some answers to questions that affect us right now are needed. Some questions would include:
- Will I be able to dual equip a legendary sword if I only own one legendary sword? (example: Shining blade in both hands)
- Will I be able to slot Conflux and Slumbering Conflux at the same time when I currently only own one Conflux? Or do I need to make a second ring and leave it at the Slumbering stage?
When you created Conflux, your previous Slumbering Conflux was given to Zommoros, so you do not have it anymore.If you made Conflux you have to make another ring to put that ring into the other ring slot.You can only use/slot what you have. Like it is now.
-
@Raychul.4237 said:Sooo, is it missing for just me?
I still have the achievement in my panel.
-
@"VoxShatterfall.5470" said:1) The Name server that Arenanet uses also conducts load balancing, not based purely on location or distance from the server, but instead based upon load for each map you join determined when you join it. The load balancing list is akin to different buckets for each and every game server, and as of late is rusting and pitting at the rim.
From what I understand, the load balancing happens when you want to enter a map. But after you are landed on a map, you are then bound to that instance (map-server, ip-number of /ip command) until the map crashes, closes, you are idle-disconnected or you leave the map yourself.
The "load balancing" algorithm that assigns you to a map-server/specific map instance also takes into account if there are already players from your guild/group/friendlist in the map you want to enter and puts you on the same map-instance if the max-capacity hard-limit of the map is not reached.
In normal conditions, any overflow will cause the game server’s balancing list to “de-prioritize” packets from the game server to be “queued”. In today’s condition, it appears that the load balancing list buckets are much too small to handle each game server’s load, allowing overflows to occur regularly, and the jagged edges occasionally causing some players to seep into the same “queued” state without an overflow actually occurring.
When I look at the tcp-packet flow between the game-client and the game-server (the map-ip that is the tcp-endpoint server-side) I do not see lost packets (wrong sequence numbers, retransmissions, etc.) or that packets server->client are delayed (queued) and are send later. I only see that there are no tcp-packets received in the client from the server for some duration in situations, where normally there should be several packets per second from server to client.
My test results would contradict your explanation, if you mean with "packets" the tcp/ip-packets from server to client. But if you mean it in a more abstract form of "data-packets" or "game-messages" that are queued (or lost) between the internal systems before the messages are encapsulated into tcp-payload of the tcp-client-server connection (and send to the client), it would makes sense and match my tests.
The "de-priorization" (of not all but some packets or connections) as a result of load/overload or a systems/software bug could also explain, why not all players (that are on the same map) report skill lag at the same time.
Is it a fact or is it speculation that Anet uses such "de-priorization" methods?
1) Avoid playing on certain maps that are very active to avoid de-prioritization (this is not a viable solution, which is why we are complaining to ANET).
Why would specific maps (like PoF and S4) maps be more vulnerable to de-prioritization (lots of players report skill lags on these maps) than other maps?
3) Use a VPN specifically designed for gaming. In certain cases this VPN can put you lower in the bucket so to speak, but its not 100% certain why this is the case. This has reportedly worked very well for some OCX players.
I believe this only makes it better if the skill-lag is a result of packet-loss in the Internet between client and server. With a VPN the packets between client and server make a detour and this sometimes circumvents the place of packet-loss.
Example: A VPN helped a lot at the time, before AWS, when Anet hosted their EU servers in Frankfurt and the interconnection between Anets hosting provider and the Deutsche Telekom was a bottleneck during peak-usage that resulted in packet-loss between server and client which resulted in skill-lags and other negative effects for a lot of GW2-users that were customers of Deutsche Telekom. But with a VPN the packets travvelled through a different provider exchange to Deutsche Telekom that was not overloaded and as a result there was no packet-loss and no skill lag with VPN.
-
I do not play and care about those other games. However, it is not unusual that similar (aka online) games / game services have similar problems.
Skill lag can have a lot of reasons. Delayed data packets, lost data packets or buggy/overloaded servers (hardware+software) or buggy/overloaded game client software (i.e. some skill lag from a recent, new online game world, which name I will not write here, has skill lag because the developers handle the keyboard input buffer wrong).
Some players have a bad local connection (bad cable or bad wifi), or a overloaded ISP, sometimes the data packets travel through overloaded lines or overloaded provider exchange points, sometimes the servers (hardware+software) of the game-company are overloaded, faulty or have buggy software. Sometimes those issues can happen at the same time (i.e. only the skill lag from a bad WLAN itself would be ok, but with the added skill lag from the servers it becomes worse).
This is all common for all online games. Even the buggy software.
However, if the "servers" from Anet are causing skill lag (and from my findings, they do at least during my tests) it is the responsibility of Anet so solve this.
It does not make the skill lag caused be Anets servers/service more tolerable just because other game companies have buggy software or overloaded servers or just because some other players have a bad WLAN.
-
@Ayrilana.1396 said:
@Zok.4956 said:@Ayrilana.1396 said:Because that’s not how it works. Servers generally do not pick and choose who has issues and who doesn’t. If there’s a series of input lag issues caused by a server, it for the most part affects everyone connected to it. The fact that some players consistently do not experience any issues when on the exact same map instance doing the exact same meta means that it’s unlikely to be a server issue.There are from time to time software/systems bugs in GW2 that cause that one version of a map is in a buggy state, and other versions (different IP) of the same map are not and only players that are on the buggy map (IP) experience problems.Because that’s not how it works. Servers generally do not pick and choose who has issues and who doesn’t.Well, of course servers do this. There could be a lot of reasons, why only some users have issues/server problems and others don't. And the more complicated the server structure, the more complicated it could be to find the reasons and to fix the issues. The hardest issues to find are the ones that do not happen allways. And sometimes, the servers "pick and choose" in a nondeterministic way. Example: race conditions.I unfortunately read that entire wiki page and don't see what it has to do with the topic at hand.You wrote, that servers do not "pick and choose", and I gave you one example that they can actually do that, even if their behaviour seems random to the persons involved.
And with "servers" I always mean a black-box (a combination of hardware and software). No server hardware runs without software.
Be aware that this reasoning of yours can also be used against you saying that it's the servers. In a few posts in one of these threads, I suggested it could be an issue with the maps themselves; not the actual IP instance/servers. I'm still unsure though how certain players can consistently be singled out while others remain completely unaffected. If anything, it's more likely to be a software/programming issue than a hardware one.
Well, the "maps themselves" are the (virtual) servers, that handle the specific maps. :)
I do not believe that the server-hardware itself is faulty. Of course it is somewhere in software or maybe sometimes the server-capactity (this includes hardware and software capabilities) is reached/exhausted and there is some overload-situation. It surely is more complicated because Anet uses Amazon "servers" and Anet probably has not their own/exclusive hardware anymore.
It also looks like the route that packets get sent back to you isn’t necessarily the same route you see when you sent them. They may go an entirely different route which could be the cause of latency.
true. But the packets that the "Amazon-cloud-gateway" (for lack of a better wording) is sending me as responses to my UDP/ICMP requests will likely travel the same way through the internet the packets from the GW2 servers travel. But of course, to make sure we would have to need access to Anets servers, or a public "looking glass server" from within the Amazon network. Which I do not have.
Perhaps there’s a way to test using the same protocol that GW2 data goes through? Possibly with similarly sized packets?
Well, there is a possibility, that the packet-sizes could be related to this. GW2 uses TCP as communication protocol between client and map-server. So I did more tests.
I did now make further tests to look at the TCP-packet-flow between the actual game-client and the game-server (the map-server).
To make it clear: I did NOT look into the GW2-packets (the TCP payload) because that would probably be a violation of the TOS and I do not want to violate the TOS. I just looked at the traffic pattern of the TCP-flow. Thats allowed.
I first wanted to establish a feeling and a baseline of the traffic-flow-pattern between client and server with several maps (home instance, core-maps, Special Forces Training Area). The base pattern is:
Result/baseline is: When I am idle (my character is standing still and no skill is used) the game-server still sends the client several packets per second (probably with updates about changes in the game world, moving players/npc etc). Only when I am idle and nothing happens/moves in the world (like in the "Special Forces Training Area" instance when I do nothing) there is a pattern of regular intervals of 3-5 seconds duration, where the server does not send any data. Of course if I move my character or use skills, there are a lot of packets per second, that are transmitted server->client and client->server.
I then went to Thunderhead Peaks map and landed directly before the last boss fight of the north meta (so the map was not completely full). I did not experience the large lag spikes of several seconds but it felt like I had a few smaller skill lags.
Afterwards I looked at the tcp-packet-flow I recorded with Tcpdump/Wireshark. Because a lot was going on during the meta (a lot of other players were moving, fighting and using their skills, a lot of mobs moving etc...) I expected to see a constant flow (several packets per second) from the server to the client.
But actually I found a few locations in the flow where the client did not receive any packets from the server for more than a second each.
If the client does not get packets from the server he can not update its own skill-display and the movement of the game-world. etc. Which is one cause for skill-lag.
This was not normal behaviour. To have no update for over a second during boss fight is bad. What could be the reason for that? I can think of three possible causes:
a) one or more packets from the server to the client were lost somewhere on the way (LAN, ISP, Internet, Amazon, etc...)b) one or more packets from the server to the client were delayed somewhere on the way (LAN, ISP, Internet, Amazon, etc...)c) during the time no packets were send to the client from the server (Anet, map, map-server, Instance,...)
For a)I looked into the TCP-flow in detail around the locations with the delay and looked (because TCP handles it, if packets are lost) if there are sequence-gaps, retransmissions etc. (thats simplified, it is complicated to make sure I miss nothing). There is nothing that indicates packet loss of the underlying IP-layer. To make a time-consuming process short: There was NO packet loss involved.
For b)If the server sends constantly 4 packets per second (as an example) and all 4 packets are delayed in one second, they would be received in the following second. But in the following second the client would not receive only the 4 packets from the second before, but also the 4 packets the server sends in the next second. So there would be some receive-pattern like:
second 1: 4 packetssecond 2: 4 packetssecond 3: 0 packets (here is the packet-delay for a second)second 4: 8 packetssecond 5: 4 packets
But with all my examinations I could not find a pattern remotely similar to this. So: A packet delay during network transport is NOT the cause.
Because I can exclude (a) and (b) it has to be ©.
Summary: The map-server (hardware, software, virtual-system, etc.) sometimes does not send data-packets to the game-client, this is not a normal server behaviour on a map where something happens and it results in a client that can not update its own state (skill activations, position of other players/npc etc...) during this communication-silence and this is a reason for skill-lag.
In my own actual, last test the gaps were a little bit longer than one second, but I am sure If I would make the same test on a map where I would experience a large skill-lag of several seconds, I would see that the server does not send packets for this several-seconds to the client. This would be consistent and probable.
Why is the "server" (hardware+software) doing this (sometimes)? I have no idea. It is Anets job to find the "why" and fix it.
-
@paShadoWn.5723 said:Makes no sense to me... why do I have to go through difficult process to get ascended but can get Legendary by mining Copper in Queensdale or unloading a wallet? It is upside-down to what it should be.
Only the first generation legendary weapons are not account bound. All other legendary gear (weapons, armor, back items, trinkets) is account bound.
And it would take a lot of time to farm copper in Queensdale to have enough gold to buy a legendary weapon in the AH. :)
-
@Ayrilana.1396 said:
@Maikimaik.1974 said:@Ayrilana.1396 said:@Maikimaik.1974 said:@Ayrilana.1396 said:@Maikimaik.1974 said:@Ayrilana.1396 said:@Trevor Boyer.6524 said:@Ayrilana.1396 said:@Trevor Boyer.6524 said:Yeah, I logged on today into the pvp mist area. My normal average ping of 70 on NA was bumping around near 500 avg. I've waited around logging in and out for hours. It's not my ISP. The problem is not on my side. This lag is unplayable.How do you know? What you said doesn’t prove that it couldn’t be your ISP.Just saw someone post in one of the couple dozen threads that they had an issue that tracked to the AWS servers, they contacted Anet, and it got troubleshooted to be with their ISP.As if everyone's home in 2020 didn't have multiple wireless connected devices on, all of the time, that weren't lagging at all.^ This works this way for years on end, nothing lags. Then suddenly at the very same time my Guild Wars 2 is getting 500 average ping, other players in Guild Wars 2 are also reporting that they are getting averages of 500 ping. And mysteriously enough, nothing else in my home that is connected to the wireless is lagging at all.Now in theory, 1+1=2, but I guess we would need to examine quite a bit further to make sure that this equation was true.I mean, I want to support the game and give the Arenanet team the benefit of a doubt as well, but come on now.Just because nothing else is lagging doesn’t mean that it’s not the ISP. The ISP is the one who routes your connection to the servers. Somewhere along that line could be having issues. There are also a lot more people using the internet which puts stress on the networks. This could exacerbate any issues.How hard can it be to understand that if dozens of people from all over the world experience severe lags at the exact same time, on the exact same map, it CANNOT be a player side issue. This has been happening for months, even before covid, it ONLY affects GW2 and only a certain set of maps.How can you seriously believe that this isn't a problem on Anets side? I'm speechless to be honest.I never said it was player side. You do realize that between the players and Anet is the ISP? How can it be the servers if it doesn’t affect everyone?How propable do you think it is that dozens of players from all over the world use the same ISP? Or that several ISPs lag at the exact same time?They all use the same infrastructure.How do you explain that this issue only affects Gw2? How do you explain that this issue only really affects a specific set of maps? (Anything PoF and newer).It doesn’t affect just GW2. If it’s just specific maps then it could very well be a PC issue. I’ve been on maps with people complaining about lag while I’m doing the exact same meta as them but experiencing no issues. Keep in mind that people have reported issues on older maps.This is obviously, without any doubt, a problem on Anets side. It cannot be an ISP issue or it wouldn't affect players from literally all over the world.Untrue.I don't understand why you can't just accept that there may be an issue on Anets side. What benefit do you get from stubbornly denying any evidence that this issue isn't on the players/IPSs side.What harm would be done by Anet looking into this issue?You are actively harming ANet by suggesting that they can't do anything about this. There's nothing more likely to turn people off a game than bad performance.Because that’s not how it works. Servers generally do not pick and choose who has issues and who doesn’t. If there’s a series of input lag issues caused by a server, it for the most part affects everyone connected to it. The fact that some players consistently do not experience any issues when on the exact same map instance doing the exact same meta means that it’s unlikely to be a server issue.There are from time to time software/systems bugs in GW2 that cause that one version of a map is in a buggy state, and other versions (different IP) of the same map are not and only players that are on the buggy map (IP) experience problems.
The fact that some players do not think they experience problems does not prove anything about the problems that other players experience.
Only players/accounts that are experiencing the problems can be used to make tests and to try to locate the problems a little bit more with testing.
And we can not know from the outside (no admin/monitoring access to Anets systems) if it is a "server/instance issue" or a "network issue" or a "software issue". In fact, it could be anything and I am sure that there are players where their own bad Wifi/WLAN is causing the problems. But this also does not prove, that there are not also other problems on Anets side. So, until we can make tests, we can not rule out anything.
I do experience often skill lag spikes (some several seconds long) in Thunderhead Peaks. So I made some tests during the time the lag spiked happend in my GW2 client and run a MTR to the map IP is was on. During the time the lag spikes happenend, the whole way the packets travel from my PC to the (first) IP of the Amazon network was clean. I had a small RTT (packet round-trip-time) of a few ms (milliseconds) without any spikes of long RTT and MTR had not one lost packet. During the whole time.
I also made tests and saw that it is is somhow map specific. On some maps (i.e. core maps) I normally have no skill lag/lag spike, but in S4 maps (especially in Thunderhead Peaks) I had very often skill lag (spikes) of several seconds.
Because we have several PC at home I also tested this with two PCs at the same time (one in core maps, one in Thunderhead Peaks, and I also switched the maps/PCs to make sure it is not PC/Hardware specific)): The PC that was in Thunderhead Peaks had skill lag (spikes), the other in core-maps had not.
The MTR to the map IPs of the Thunderhead Peaks map and the core map travelled the same way through the internet to the same Amazon IP of the Amazon gateway.
So, I am pretty sure, that, during my test, definitely not my internet-connection/access and definitely not "the Internet" (faulty or overloaded providers or provider interconnections) between my PC and the gateway of the Amazon network (Amazon cloud, or whatever you call it) caused the skill lag spikes.
So, what else could it be?
The only part the packets travel that I could not test further was inside the "Amazon Cloud/Network/Servers" where Anets game servers are.As a result, logic dictates it is has to be somewhere located in the "Amazon cloud" (network, servers, software) and as a result it is the responsibility of Anet to fix this.
I only talk about my own tests. I can not prove/disprove if this is true for other players. I am sure there are players with bad WLAN/Wifi that is causing the same problems.
Because that’s not how it works. Servers generally do not pick and choose who has issues and who doesn’t.
Well, of course servers do this. There could be a lot of reasons, why only some users have issues/server problems and others don't. And the more complicated the server structure, the more complicated it could be to find the reasons and to fix the issues. The hardest issues to find are the ones that do not happen allways. And sometimes, the servers "pick and choose" in a nondeterministic way. Example: race conditions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_condition
What is different between PoF/S4 maps and other maps, that could be the reason? The map itself (how complicated it is to process it on server side and client side, how much data flows between client and server, the software code) and of course the IP of the map server (which probably means, that it is handled by a different map server/instance).
It is not unusal (it has happened often in the past) in GW2, that some maps (map IPs) are stuck in some buggy state (caused by overload, software bugs etc) and other versions of the same map (other IPs) have no problem at all. As a result: Some players experience problems, others do not.
I do not know the internal structure of the Anet game servers to make better educated guesses about the reason why this exact problems happen not to all players. It could be related to time-of-day or how much players are on the same map, or how much map-instances are running at the same time. Or something else. Whatever.
But I do know that my own tests ruled out "The Internet" and my own equipment. So it has to be somwhere located in the Amazon network (Amazon/Anet) and it is the responsibility of Anet to fix this.
-
@Patrick.2987 said:Too many awesome players out there need to get the attention they deserve. Please give some money to all the players still wasting their time in this game. Some even quit school to get money here and live on welfare.
Too bad. Maybe you can try to get a job in Anets QA department.
ESL was a success only from a marketing cost standpoint, could not attract enough new players and sponsors and died around the time Colin Johanson left the company.
-
@"Mutisija.5017" said:gw2 has spoiled me completely because it does not have the "kill 10 of X and collect 10 of Y" missions that are staple in pretty much every mmorpg ever.
Have you played the Saga / Season 5 recently and looked into the achievements (the new way of quests/missions)?
also in whole lot of other mmorpgs i am required to actively team up with other players to do group missions.
Have you played Strikes and Raids? Yes, they are optional, but they do gate parts of the game/content/gear/achievements.
GW2 changed a lot since it was released. Some "core values" of the game are still valid, but over the years a lot of different devs did not follow the "core values" but instead followed their own ideas and with this created a lot of inconsistencies. Not all of this ideas made the game better.
-
@Bast.7253 said:
@Fueki.4753 said:@"Kalythsu.8350" said:Episode 5 october 2020Episode 6 december 2020Episode 7 february 2020Episode 8 : April 2020Expansion : September 2021That's a very optimistic view.I'd say we get the vision we are allegedly getting next at the end of Septembre and then an episode every three months.That'd place episode 8 somewhere in Autumn 2021.If we get not epilogue, the expansion got launch in time for the Yule festivities in Decembre 2021.If we get an epilogue, the expansion would launch two to three months into 2022 (possibly overlapping with Chinese New Year in February).And I hope they take the time to make it good instead of the low quality of Season 5.Given the recent world events and the delay from Covid, the fact that a studio who is usually pretty candid about details in general, specifically stated 2021 as the release date... I'm going to say that 2021 is pretty assured. Not saying it couldn't be December, but I doubt they would say 2021 as confidently as they have if they had even the slightest hesitation of it being postponed to 2022.I am pretty sure, that they have internally an estimated release date and a latest release date. And that they will release the game in the worst case at the latest release date and will ship all the things, that they have until then (without telling us, what was planned and is not finished/shipped).
Remember the Gen. 2 legendary weapons of HoT? I am pretty sure a full set was planned for the HoT release, but it took much longer than estimated, so they shipped HoT only with 3 legendary weapons and not a full set. And said, that the remaining ones will be delivered later.
Depending on the team size, which we don't have any solid information on, they could have people rotating between living story episodes or have a much larger team working on the expansion in general. I don't remember how many people they have at the studio or the associated roles, but I believe it was 400 or so before the layoffs? So presumably still 200 people or so? Could be wrong on that.
Between 200-270 remained after the lay-offs and it was said, that these will not work on other "side projects", but will focus exclusively on GW2. So a lot of people hoped, that we would get more content (per month/quarter etc...) for GW2 than what we got before the lay-offs when (most of) the company worked on several unannounced side-projects.
The content we get now feels like it's made by significantly fewer. So either they've shifted a lot to other projects or they've shifted them off to the expansion. It really doesn't feel like they were working on this "all along" and lied about it, it seems like they quickly shifted gears at some point and started on it.
During the announcements of the Season 5 / Saga, Anet said, that the Saga is the way how Anet wants to deliver new content instead of an Expansion and that they are not working on an Expansion and that they are not planning to (at that time).
And still, we only got half an Saga-episode every two month. The amount of content we got every two months never felt like the whole company was working on the Saga.
My guess is, that they internally decided end of 2019 / beginning of 2020 to make an expansion. And that all the (bigger) things that were planned for the Saga are now delayed and will be included in the Expansion.
So I'm going to assume they've got a pretty large team working on it.
We actually do not know if Anet is only working on the Saga (a little bit) and on the Expansion (a lot), or if they are again working on unannounced side-projects.
-
@"kharmin.7683" said:Sure that this has nothing to do with the entire world being locked up at home during a pandemic and that the internet infrastructure isn't currently able to handle the significantly increased load? Just a possibility, no?
Yes, I am sure: https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/1328421/#Comment_1328421
The cause for the skill lags is not my PC or the internet connection between my PC and the Amazon network, but it is somewhere in the Amazon network, probably at Anets servers/instances. If Amazon could not provide a good and reliable service to Anet, it would also be Anets problem, and Anet and or Amazon have to fix this.
-
@Astyrah.4015 said:
@"Keitaro.9061" said:Anet... what are you doing?What are your plans on addressing this issue?When are you planning on releasing an actual "FIX" to this issue?they are aware atleast that it's an issue, and released a statement recently about it (after so many months of lagging)Initially I misread your statement like this: "after so many months of laughing (at us)"
The statement from Anet "The reality is there's no single sweeping change that can fix latency issues for all players, or even most players. " is not completely wrong. There will always be players that have local problems (i.e. bad Wifi/WLAN). And Anet probably has to make more than one single change to fix the problem.
But the statement is very misleading (and I would add: kind of dishonest) because the skill lags on the PoF/season-4 maps are clearly a problem on the side of Amazon/Anet that Anet and/or Amazon has to fix.
-
Yes, Wifi can be a very unreliable connection. Not only other applications (like bluetooth) can use the same frequencies, but also because the signal can be blocked from walls and also because there are not a lot Wifi channels and if you have a lot of neigbours that also use Wifi, this also can have a negative impact on your signal quality.
But this does not help in cases where players do not use Wifi, but only ethernet-cables and where the "last mile" is clean.
You can check this yourself.
Go load the tool "WinMTR" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MTR_(software) from https://github.com/White-Tiger/WinMTR/releasesAnd when you are playing GW2 you enter /ip in the chat windows. GW2 shows you the actual IP-number of the map you are playing. This IP-number (example : 18.157.191.173) you enter in the "host" field in WinMTR and then you click start.
And then you let WinMTR run and play GW2 at the same time.
When I do this in Thunderhead Peaks, I got for the first 8 hops:
Host % Sent Recv Best Avrg Wrst Last 192.168.178.1 0 1449 1449 0 0 10 1 p3e9f45432.dip0.t-ipconnect.de 0 1449 1449 6 8 32 7 d-ed5-i.D.DE.NET.DTAG.DE 0 1449 1449 8 8 30 10 xe-5-2-0-0.ldn4nqp1.uk.ip.tdc.net 0 1449 1449 8 10 37 9 150.222.4.22 0 1449 1449 8 10 32 10 150.222.4.31 0 1449 1449 8 9 38 10 Request timed out. 100 291 0 0 0 0 0 52.93.135.129 0 1449 1449 11 13 34 13 The IP-number 52.93.135.129 belongs to Amazon: https://whois.arin.net/rest/net/NET-52-84-0-0-1/pft?s=52.93.135.129
This means: During the whole time WinMTR was running, not one packet on the way to the amazon-network (and back) from WinMTR was lost (the 100% loss of hop 7 is probably because it is firewalled) and the ping-time was between 0 ms and 37 ms, average was 6-10 ms.
But at the exact same time the WinMTR was running and logged the above numbers, I had skill lag/delays of several seconds playing on the Thunderhead Peaks map.
Because the network connection from my PC to the amazon network is clean, this can not be the cause for the skill lag. It has to be caused somewhere in the Amazon internal network/servers, probably at Anets servers/instances. It is a problem that Anet/Amazon has to solve.
If you would have done the same when you had a bad WLAN/Wifi-connection, you would have seen packet loss and/or bad ping numbers in the first hops.
-
@Diku.2546 said:ANet....please wake up & realize WvW still has the potential to become the next eSport to be able to host an Annual Tournament equivalent to the NFL Superbowl...imho
Please don't throw away your opportunity to create an Annual Tournament equivalent to the NFL Superbowl before another company takes this niche.
Please wake up. WvW does not have the potential to become this kind of eSports and never had.
WvW will always have population imbalances (and to have equal numbers of players on both teams is very important - removing even one player from the field/game is often used as a big penalty in team sports).
WvW is actually WvWvW. It is a three-way fight which is unfair in its core. This is sometimes part of the fun of WvW. But eSports has to be fair (needs at least to have fair rules).
WvW classes are not balanced and probably never will be. Class balancing seems to be beyond Anets skills. This unbalanced classes will not attract a lot of eSports players. When Anet tried to build an eSports scene with sPVP in the past, the scene was destroyed mostly because of how Anet handled and changed the class balances.
-
@Tharnaron.2967 said:So I have been playing WvW almost exclusively now for about 6 months and am wondering why not add a reward system for the end of week battle ranking.
There were server rewards in the past during the WvW tournaments. It actually lead to burned out players (a week is just too long for this) and more server stacking.
And the players that do not bandwaggon to already stacked servers would be punished more if there would be rewards based on server rankings.
-
@Firebeard.1746 said:I don't actually have a single legendary yet, but I feel like it will motivate me to work harder on them. I REALLY want this.
You could start now to collect all the currencies and materials you need for the legendaries you like (it will take some time), but just don't build them if you are unsure.
If/when the legendary armory comes, and it is to your liking, then you can insta-build your legendaries. And if you do not like the legendary armory, you can still build legendaries or sell the materials you have and build a lot of ascended gear.
-
@Alin.2468 said:Relax... the Steam marketing stunt is just to increase sales before the end. Amazon will release a new MMO in spring, and it will have battlegrounds and GvG (things that have been asked here since release 8 years ago).
You mean the Amazon pvp-only game that had a release date a year ago, and then shortly before the release Amazon decided to change it into a PvE game and announced a release date of summer 2020, and this summer they realized that they do not have a lot of PvE content and announced a release in next year? The game that will probably be a prime example of that you can create a bad game with a lot of money?
The end is nigh around here, while waiting for an expansion with dragons.
End of the world predicted. Film at 11.
-
@jwhite.7012 said:
@anninke.7469 said:IDK, I didn't really need to expand my bank tabs or inventory slots until about my 4th year in the game. So far I haven't bought more than two bank tabs and one additional bag slot for one character. The rest of my toons don't even have all their bags with 20 slots. And still I rarely have any issues with inventory space. I think I don't understand why anyone would store things like dyes and skins in bank/inventory when they can go to wardrobe. Or why would they keep the leveling reward stuff when it becomes useless. And why would anyone keep quest and progression items? Maybe, just maybe, it's more of a management issue than an inventory-space one...I've got an entire tab of skins alone... Some of the ascended backs take multiple steps to craft, so there's a tab entirely dedicated to that. Tab for all the random world events. Tab for all ascended accessories from WvW, and Fractals. WvW tab with all siege equipment for commanding. Tab for food and utilities. I think you get the point.I had an entire bank tab of skins and another one of ascended rings that I both collected over the years.
I then realized that I already had enough transmutation charges and destroyed all my skins (all the ones, that I did not want to sell) because if I wanted to use a skin, I could just use a transmutation charge. I sometimes change skins, but over the months I still get more transmutation charges than I actually use. So I lost practically nothing when I deleted the skins.
And for the ascended rings: I just keep the most needed stats (berserker, marauder, ...) and everything else I salvage. And if I need some rare stat that I do not have, I just buy one with season 3 currency.
If a player is a hoarder, there will never be enough inventory/bank space. B)
I think you get the point. ;)
-
[ x] I am not hyped and I am not excited about Cantha. Because I never played in Cantha in GW1.
I had pre-ordered HoT and also PoF and liked both of them and had a lot of fun with both expansions.
But I will not blindly pre-order EoD because of the (too low) quality and (too little) quantity of the Icebrood Saga. I will wait until there is more info about the expansion and I will then decide if I also pre-order EoD or wait until it is released (or wait until the public betas show more from the game).
-
Yes, it is frustrating that it is so buggy.
After some practicing I was able to finish the race without the skimmer-dive in time with me ele and the help of skills that increase the speed like "Eye of the Storm","Mist Form", "Signet of Air" and a +20 swim speed infusion. Without the +20 swim speed infusion I was always 2-3 portals away from the finish line when the time ran out.
And then after one meta run in Dragonfall I had enough XP to unlock the "Skimming the Depths" mastery.
Your servers are getting laggy on more maps - [Merged]
in Bugs: Game, Forum, Website
Posted
Please write this line next time at the start of your text. B)