Blur Busters Forums

If you're "not giving up and dealing with it", and you haven't started, begin now in creating a detailed journal/logbook (like a Google Sheets or Docs) of everything you've tried so far, in orthographical order. Having a troubleshoot logbook will make helping you much easier.

Some of those can become long, like more than ten screenfuls long, and take months, so be prepared and be patent before logbook-sharing begins to bear fruit in online help. "I tried everything" doesn't make it easy for me to offer help -- create a big homework-sized paper too. Even this forum thread is incomplete. I know it's boring work, but you gotta do it if you're doing a "I need forum help" route like you're doing today. It earns an appreciation of the effort that one does to troubleshoot issues -- and realize you might not have done specific tests fully (e.g. you did a test before an upgrade but didn't do new measurements after an upgrade to see if there's even a tiny improvement, etc). So it creates better measurement habits. And detailed log can mean your reward is more detailed help.

If you're so sure it's network lag, have you tried the Business Internet service of any of your ISPs?
Related topic on "many ISPs" -- sometimes one gets desparate. The support from business can be much better, even if you are paying 3x the price for the same Internet speed. In some cases, it removes a lot of traffic shaping algorithms from your connection, while giving you better technical support (e.g. quicker upgrades/replacement of a congested node if you're complaining about latency problems). There are even cases where a business connection bypasses all the traffic-shaping / microthrottling / securityscanning FUD and gives you better ping consistency especially in the upstream channel, even when sharing the same cable Internet node with consumer users. Other times it is no difference except that phone calls are answered faster with quicker fixes for Internet problems (And better node maintenance). These stories do sometimes borne fruit, so it's an unturned stone to try.

I know people who paid $100-$200/mo for a business Internet connection equivalent to an $50-$100/mo connection to solve a gaming problem. Overkill, but it worked for them when there were no alternate options. Even providers like Comcast give you red carpet treatment if you're paying business rates and will take business complaints far more seriously.

Some people do that with companies like Charter, Rogers, Comcast, etc, to resounding success -- getting a congested cable node upgraded quickly upon a phone call, etc. If three or four business subscribers on the same node does it, that can even trigger a backbone upgrade (e.g. 1gbit -> 10gbit etc) to the node to uncongest it for everyone on the same block so that everyone on block suddenly gets less ping jitter. Whee!

It does not always happen but I hear so many stories about how support is so much better when you bite the bullet, swallow hard, and simply just massively overpay your hated ISP for premium business. Yes, sometimes it ends in failure and tears. Rinse and repeat for each ISP if you're rich! It does not always happen but it's a route available if you have funds. But the business dollar kinda speaks loudly at even the bottom-barrel ISPs, and I've heard of "this last resort worked" stories.

Pro gaming versus recreational gaming creates a major difference of process-think for troubleshooting: Just go straight to the best Internet connection your country (or another) can offer, even if it means moving. That allows you to be more assured that problems is probably system-related or game-related, a narrower venn diagram to troubleshoot.

If you are a pro gamer playing for money, sometimes your esports career warrants moving to a specific location that has great Internet. Some esports teams are now doing that, living in a Gaming House (Wikipedia) -- adjusting your living location just to get the best Internet available in your country for a team of professional gamers. It's an extreme approach that is currently being utilized to solving gaming problems.

Now, many of us aren't THAT involved to such an approach; we just want to have fun playing our game recreationally. I just say to tell you that some pros do that now.

Either way, that is assuming that the weak link is not elsewhere (e.g. the game itself, etc) or placebo effects.

A udp ping is not some mystical tool its easily within the reach of someone with a moderate aptitude for computers.

It shouldn't be compared to buying and using high end monitor measurement tools. It's not in the same realm whatsoever.

I guess spending anywhere from a few minutes to a few hours depending on your skill level to measure an internet protocols performance is well beyond what you are willing to do. And that's ok. It just means you are bad people to get network related advice from.

I love all the random theories. But the other side of science is measurement and testing. I guess within the realm of networking that is where you draw the line. I don't.

And I honestly don't think the guy has even run a statistically conclusive number of regular icmp pings. Since everyone keeps advising against ANY form of measurement.

yes my brain gets better at my friends house thats why im able to play at a higher skill level my reaction time suddenly becomes elite at my friends house and becomes slower than a turtle at my house random theory and mystical problem you are 100 percent correct in your assumptions

Also CSGO is famouse for hitreg problems. There are videos of people at lan tournaments getting massive hitreg issues.

ive done exactly as youve asked and numbers are all fine

open wrote:yes my brain gets better at my friends house thats why im able to play at a higher skill level my reaction time suddenly becomes elite at my friends house and becomes slower than a turtle at my house random theory and mystical problem you are 100 percent correct in your assumptions

I am saying that you should TEST the problems.

But I guess that your brain does have issues. Because you misunderstood that I was saying a problem doesn't exist.

Again the reading comprehension of this thread is amazing.

And the only ones committed to making assumptions are the ones opposing testing.

honestly you are all beyond help. Stay at your level. And enjoy it

In Blur Busters fashion, I'll add more fuel to fire -- because....lurkers/readers + "controversial topic".

One must thought-experiment to consider exactly what "numbers are fine" means.

One have to define "numbers are fine".

I'll add that recent research is starting to show that even tiny 1ms-2ms ping volatility-changes actually creates noticeable hitreg issues in certain games. 2ms-amplitude ping volatility has noticeable hitreg feel differences nowadays when the noisefloor clears (fast GtG, ultrahigh framerates, high tickrate, etc). The games have predictive latency algorithms, try to compensate for the latency. Whereas 1ms-2ms often didn't matter at 60Hz and 125Hz mice and low resolution 32-tick or 64-tick servers of yesterday -- today at 300fps and 240Hz and 128-tick and 1000Hz mice, even millisecond-scale ping volatility changes potentially create hitreg-feel changes. Even when ping volatility is only 25% of the tick interval (1/128sec versus 1/500sec) there's already human-detectable hitreg feel effects today when all the other noisefloors drop off below our feet.

The latency compensation algorithms means you've often done a headshot that is annoyingly ignored by the server because it was voided by a latency-compensation algorithm on the server, etc. At 240Hz and ultrahigh framerates -- even tinier ping volatility changes can noticeably screw around with a specific game's hitreg.

So... again one often needs to define what the hell "numbers are fine" means. Netcode engineering of over 10 years ago often did not consider progress today. The game makers keeps the netcode latency compensation aglorithms quite a black box so it's hard to figure out how it's screwing around.

Yesterday "numbers are fine" norms have changed today compared to ten years ago.

I wish more network tools will visualize nowadays. Command line ping is garbage nowadays when a scatterplot graph answers a lot more questions about tiny ping volatility changes from time-of-day or ISP-changes. Even that may not answer many questions (if that), but it's surprisingly as we unpeel more onion layers off the statistical noise of competitive gaming...weaknesses keep revealing themselves.

These days it unfortunately has ceased to be enough to say "numbers are fine". One has to show proof. A good visualization (ping latency scatterplot graph) is more powerful than command line ping. Maybe begin graphing your latency-volatility visualization everytime you troubleshoot and add them in [img] tags. We Blur Busters love that stuff.